What is National Security?

IMG_0009

Sunrise from a treestand!

The National Security Agency has been under the gun for spying on U.S. citizens, along with all their other made up enemies.  When I first began writing here at SUFA, I wrote an article about how government propaganda has affected this country in ways that may no be healthy or necessary.  I discussed many things in the article, but one thing pertaining to this article is the Cold War.  Many of you may remember that I asked how you would feel if you found out that the Cold War was nothing but fear mongering and government propaganda.  I do recall the end of the Cold War, but many of you grew up fearing the nuclear attacks from Russia, that never came.  As I have heard from some Russians of the time, they too were fed the same bullshit.  But what was the real reason for this kind of fear mongering at the behest of the government?  Are we not still living the exact same thing today, but with a different boogieman?  The answers are right in front of all of us, now to just see and understand them.

Let me begin by saying that my premise in the past article stands today.   The Cold War was nothing but propaganda and fear mongering.  This allowed governments, namely ours and theirs, to expand in many areas, while our tax dollars, then, now, and future generations, could be spent to pay for it.  Well, mission accomplished.  No one really fears a nuclear attack anymore, mainly because there are so many of them that an attack would likely lead to the end of humanity.  So, without the evil Russians being a scare factor, here comes the terrorists.  The spectacular events of 9-11-01 are imbedded in all our memories, but since then, well, mostly nothing.  The bombing in Boston was not really a Muslim Terrorist attack, although they want us to believe that it was.  I’m still not convinced it WASN’T a government sponsored false flag, considering what actually occurred that day and who was on hand at the scene.  But that’s not my subject today, so let that go for now.

The NSA, a somewhat new government agency, which has a huge facility in Utah that is designed to collect and store data, has been under fire for spying on all of us, clearly in violation of our protected Constitutional rights.  The last 17 words in that sentence are quite important, which all of you should know by now.  First of all, our Federal Government, with it’s origins in the Constitution, has two very important jobs.  They are simple.  Protect the Nation from foreign invasion and to PROTECT the citizens rights outlined in the Bill of Rights.  The first part, foreign invasion, doesn’t really require much.  No foreign nation would ever invade this country.  To do that would require a massive nuclear strike, which would defeat the whole purpose of invasion to begin with, to reap the spoils, which is what all invasions are intended to do.  See the history of the planet if you have questions.

While none of this is new, it’s just going to get worse until “we the people” step up and say “no more, your fired”.  If you haven’t noticed, all those rights outlined in the Bill of Rights have been continually either ignored or destroyed.  The NDAA, National defense Authorization Act, the Patriot Act, the Food Safety and Modernization Act of 2110 and so on, have managed to make it legal to take away our rights under numerous Amendments.  Want to fly in a plane, give up your rights to unlawful search and seizure.  Want to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights, better check your state and local laws, even in your own house.  Forget privacy now, under the ACA, aka Obamacare, your privacy is gone once you sign up.  They, the Federal Government now owns you, which has been their goal all along.   They can destroy you financially and medically if they chose to do so, and you and I can’t do shit to stop them, period.

I don’t know how much more obvious things can get when it comes to being ruled, rather than represented, but I can write a book of examples and beat most people senseless with it, if I could lift it up to begin with.  People, freedom is under attack, not you or I, but our way of life.  With a new year dawning, it’s time to wake the hell up!

As has been our recent custom here at SUFA, all subjects are open for discussion.  I would like to wish everyone a Happy New Year!  My all your dreams come true in 2014 🙂

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Reblogged this on Brittius.com.

  2. Good Morning SUFA 😎

    • plainlyspoken says:

      Ah G…..giving it the old college try once again. Good for you and good morning to you as well. 🙂

      • There is no more important battle than the one for freedom. It’s nice to have you around again my friend, hopefully we will hear from you on a somewhat regular basis 😉

  3. The constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and peace, and it covers with its shield of protection all classes of men, at all times and under all circumstances.

    No doctrine involving more pernicious consequences was ever invented by the wit of men that any of its great provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of Government.

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      The only means that the people were given to enforce the Constitution on the Government were elections, and most of us know how well THOSE work for us….

      • Good Morning Peter 🙂

        There is also the Amendment process, which I believe is under way as we speak. Also, when enough people get fed up with the crooks in DC, we march into DC and slap down the NEW Declaration of Independence and demand the current government disban and new elections, with a new Constitution severely limiting the Federal governments powers. Just a thought 😉

    • Flagster, let’s try to use simple English so dumbies like me don’t have to ask what the hell are you trying to say 🙂

      But if I have decoded your thoughts, your correct, the Constitution and it’s contents was never written so that it may be suspended by anybody. However, as I said to Peter, it needs some changes the severely limit the Feds, and this crew in DC needs thrown out on their asses. It can be done, with enough people involved.

      PEACE 😎

  4. A quick poll: Do we need the NSA?

    • I might go with it’s 80’s/90’s electronic eavesdropping of foreign communications and it’s mission statement & restrictions then. When we have a hostile foreign environment, N. Korea, Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt, full press on monitoring all communications. Russia & China, monitor what you can but avoid provoking another cold war. I think a better question is the Patriot Act, keep it or repeal it? Some will say modify it back to it’s original intent, to monitor foreign nationals that communicate within the US. Sorry, the trust has been broken. It must be repealed.

  5. Dale A. Albrecht says:

    I would like to think of the Constitution as a contract. Usually a contract signed by both parties is mutually beneficial and provides ample wiggle room for either party to get out of the contract. Unfortunately, the Constitution and the way the government is run the contract is for one of the party’s only. As stated before on SUFA and has in-fact happened in our history and currently occuring, rights are being suspended as fast as we can write about them by the government and sustained by the courts. Not only public courts by secret courts like FISA where no opposing view is considered but the governments. Legislation doesn’t matter, what the congress passes or not. Laws are being modified and created illegally by the executive administrations at will, with no consequence. I seriously doubt that we will ever see another ammendment to the constitution make it to the States for ratification. The government doesn’t want to be bothered with little details like what the people think or want. As stated numerous times on SUFA, voting is a waste of time. Voting was supposed to be the main avenue for the people to affect the government and legislation, but the government clearly ignores the people and treats us in utter contempt. Ammendments, we’ll doubtfully never see again, but the last is the 2nd ammendment. As Jefferson explained the reasoning for that ammendment, was to keep the government from becoming a tyranny and remain fearful of the people. The government today has no fear in any way of the people and with unrelenting pressure, methodically dismantling the our rights for our own alleged safety. Because the people are to stupid to know what they really want. So yes I agree with Gman, the “War on Terror” is just yet another boogie man being used to strip us of more rights under the quise of law.

    • I agree with you as well Dale, the problem is we can’t hammer this into some thick headed people with a 20lb sledge hammer. They refuse to believe that the game they play is not designed for them to win, but simply give them the illusion that their voices matter. There are a few Congressman aloud to serve as the voice of freedom, once again, to provide the illusion that voting works. But these few voices are seriously outnumbered and will always be that way. The two party system is designed that way. Paul and Cruz etc can scream till they can’t talk, nothing will ever come of it. It is no different for those on the Left, they think they’re winning right now, an illusion as well. Everybody is losing except for the elite. we aren’t invited to their parties, we’re only there to serve them. Each day that goes by and the people are silent, the worse it will get. 👿

    • “the “War on Terror” is just yet another boogie man being used to strip us of more rights under the quise of law.”

      Or something else…. 9/11 happened. The “War on Terror” was Bushes ideal. Maybe brilliant, maybe just another bait & switch from our two-party system that march in lockstep. Most of the terrorists were Saudi’s, our #2 M.E. Allie? Did we refuse to make war on them because of our oil dependence? Instead invade two other countries that needed some reckoning, but were not attacking us. Bush sent a message to the world that the USA could & would destroy any that attacked us. Obama has sent a different message to the world, yet kept the same ramped up paranoia active to grow governments power over the people.

      We were told (by Bush & others) the Patriot Act was necessary to keep us safe. It didn’t work at Ft. Hood, despite clear warnings, nor Boston, nor Benghazi….Have to wonder could several different agencies be that incompetent to fail so massively? Or was it deliberate? More fear to sold in exchange for our freedom?

      The “War on Terror” may be bad policy, but that doesn’t mean there are not millions out there hostile to any/all Americans/Westerners/Christians. The Patriot Act may be bad law/policy, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be looking for those with hostile intent. We had intelligence on Ft. Hood, Boston, & Benghazi. Not from the NSA or Pat. Act, but from normal intelligence gathering. If we had used that & common sense, we might find we don’t need to spy on ourselves…

      • If we would use some common sense, we’d remove the current government and replace them. Saudi funded 9-11-01, that’s been proven and Bush and Obama know it. 5 of the 19 hijackers were later determined to be alive and well. The whole story was BS. Enriching the IMC seems to be a habit for us, that needs to stop.

        • “Saudi funded 9-11-01”

          Has not ben proven to me. I will say it might be true, but I doubt it. Orca’s Razor say the simplest explanation usually is correct. (misspell is just to make Anita jump in) As I understand it, no Saudi citizen has to work for a living. Being a small, rich country has some perks. Can you imagine living like that? Such a different culture. Also as I understand it, their state schools all teach Islam as part of the required education (indoctrination). Included in the lessons is Israel/Jews are their enemy to be conquered/enslaved/destroyed along with the rest of us unbelievers. And then you have the royal family and all those damned princes, those RICH, damned princes. Who because of their rich, spoiled upbringing, sometimes hang with the wrong crowd. Imagine if Bill Ayers had a millionaire BFF in the Weather Underground….

          I think we can all agree attacking Iraq was a political move, not military. It would have made more sense to attack Mexico, except that would not have sent the desired political message. So our government, including both parties, lie to us to advance their agenda. The media seems to have it’s own or a liberal agenda, and so we face propaganda presented as news. And since we have our 1st amendment & a free press, we believe they will do their jobs and truthfully report.

          • Actually, the Saudi revelation came from newly released govt documents that were classified and excluded from the 911 report. The leak comes from several Congressman, not some yahoo. I’ve been to Saudi and met one of the Prince’s (had tea and dates no less). They are Muslim’s, period. They have religious police, that uphold the religious laws, including making sure the Saudi’s are praying when their supposed too. They still stone their own for crimes such as stealing, infidelity etc. At least that was the case in ’90-’91. Saudi nationals didn’t work then, some did while serving in the military. They are all wealthy and import workers from poor countries.

            Interesting events as of late in Russia, after Saudi threatened them with terrorist attacks. WWIII isn’t far off, too many economic problems and other crap that don’t mean crap to us here. But we’ll be dragged in anyway, as history has proven.

            The media, the big one’s are bought and paid for by the political parties and government, I trust none of them, even FOX. I’ll believe the alternative stuff, within reason, because they don’t answer to the elite, yet. They are lying to us, period. What statistic do they report that’s true? Unemployment, no way, inflation, a fricken lie as well. I don’t believe shit from government or their paid media asskissers. 🙂 Smile, 2014 is just around the corner and we made it!

            • Just A Citizen says:

              How do you know the “alternative” media are not TOOLS of certain “Elites”?

              How do you know they don’t want you to believe all this contrarian and conspiracy stuff.

              What better way to foment a radical arm within the country that they can then use as the next “boogeyman” to justify their Power Grabbing Ways. 😉

          • ““Saudi funded 9-11-01″

            Has not ben proven to me”

            The Saudi financing is an unequivocal fact.

            • Again, it has not been proven to me. I am totally prepared to believe it, but have not seen proof. And while I can & will give you & G! credit for accuracy, I’m not going to tell all my friends & family the Saudi’s were behind 9/11 because some guys I blog with say it is an established fact. Next thing you know, they would ask why we attacked Afghanistan & Iraq if the Saudi’s were proven to be the main culprit. (you can even take that as a question directed at yourselves)

  6. Hijack, just too funny not to post. (goto article for links)

    December 30, 2013
    What the media isn’t telling you about that ice-bound ship
    Thomas Lifson

    Call the irony police. You’ve probably been hearing a lot about that “cruise ship” stuck in the ice off the coast of Antarctica, especially now that two icebreakers have been frustrated in their attempts to rescue the 74 occupants. But until this morning I hadn’t heard this (via Doug Powers at Michelle Malkin.com):

    Australian climate change professor Chris Turney, passengers and media hoping to get pictures penguins windsurfing where ice should be set out on an expedition to demonstrate the effects of global warming on Antarctica. The ship and all on board have now been trapped in ice for almost a week and counting. (snip)

    Turney runs a company called Carbonscape that aims to “fix carbon from the atmosphere and make a host of green bi-products, helping reduce greenhouse gas levels.” (snip)

    Check out this statement: Even as they sit trapped in sea ice, the expedition continues to point out that climate change is causing a disappearance of sea ice.

    Update:

    Anthony Watts has video of Mawson landing in 1912 in ice free Commonwealth Bay – the same area the current “global warming” expedition sits helplessly trapped in ice. Lots of other interesting stuff at the link as well.

    Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/12/what_the_media_isnt_telling_you_about_that_ice-bound_ship.html#ixzz2ozNxEeXI

    • Leave them there till the ice melts, take a picture and use it as an example of what happens to idiots who fall for ridiculous frauds. According to Al Gore, there shouldn’t be any ice! WTF! The sad part is that many people still believe the fraud, even though the earth hasn’t gotten warmer since 1998. Why do people believe in so much BS?

    • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

      Arctic sea ice is 555,000 sq. km below normal currently (normal being the 1979-2006 average), but ANTARCTIC sea ice is 1,500,000 sq. km ABOVE normal currently. It is quite unsurprising that the ship got stuck in 3m thick sea ice.

      • Dale A. Albrecht says:

        PeterB……Everything tries to keep in balance. The old cliche of “nature abhors a vacuum” comes to mind. One of the first things I alway look for in a report like the climate debate is the statement “since records have been kept” Those terms usually define a very narrow range of the debate, but usually people assume it covers all time immemorial.

  7. HIEL OBAMA: The age of “Show your papers” is fast approaching. Welcome to NAZI Amerika 🙄

    The big catch to having a WHTI-compliant national ID, though, is that not only is it yet another route for tracking you and putting your personal information in the government’s spying apparatus, but any person who doesn’t have their ID won’t be able to travel anywhere legally.

    The TSA will prevent you from air travel, with trains and boats soon to follow. Of course, driving anyplace without a license is a good way to get tossed in the slammer already, and hidden in the DHS’s security protocols are plans for establishing freeway checkpoints and roadblocks where you will be asked for your papers.

    Should any state not comply with the federal regulations, its entire population will be barred from travel until it gets in line.

    Read more at http://godfatherpolitics.com/13785/papers-please-homeland-security-push-national-id-transit-documents/#YxHzi2Xbuj8jb8Pa.99

  8. G! Can we agree that I’m disagreeable? Or playing devils advocate..

    “The Cold War was nothing but propaganda and fear mongering. ”
    BullDookey.

    After WW2, Russia consolidated territory that was not theirs and looked to be bent on expansion thru conquest. Just like Germany. The US emerged as the superpower & did not want to fight another world war. The Cuban Missile Crisis was a real event. Does not mean The USSR would ever push the button and that we weren’t told countless lies. It helps to reflect we only look at this from out perspective.

    Remember Ruby Ridge? Why didn’t they surrender when the FBI sent their robot to open up a line of communication? The robot had a camera, mic & speaker… OH, and a shotgun. Imagine looking at a 12 Ga aimed at you spouting peaceful intentions…Russia was afraid of us & our tech edge. Add to that the many boneheaded moves we made like installing the Shaw of Iran. We were both the victim & cause of mutual distrust & fear.

    I think it’s fair to say big gov. & big business took advantage of that fear. Both have now learned all they have to do is find something to scare the public, promise to protect them, and watch the votes/$$$ pour in…

    • OK Mr. Advocate 🙂

      Russia didn’t have the troops to expand after WWII, the Russian army was damn near destroyed by the Nazi’s. They had no desire to do much but rebuild their own cities. While over the years, they did nothing that we aren’t doing today. They wanted to spread Communism, we, Democracy. The lives lost to push/defend those ideas is astronomical, as well as completely stupid.

      How do you know the Cuban missile crisis was real? Did the government claim it to be real? Or did you see it for yourself? (I can play devil’s advocate as well). JFK didn’t want the Vietnam war, despite what others wanted. The CMC could have been nothing more than a CIA attempt to scare him into Vietnam. The military industrial complex loves their wars my friend, that don’t mean they were necessary. 😉

      Communism was real and easy to use for propaganda. It worked as we spent trillions on our never ending military buildup. That was the goal of the Cold War, to enrich those involved in the military industrial complex. As a country, we are guilty, just as much as Russia and China, for trying to push our political views on others. Do we really need to continue down that path?

      Back to the boogieman. Our current boogieman, Al Qaeda, is a fabrication of the CIA and funded by them. The State Dept is sending them weapons in Syria for Pete’s sake, what other proof do people need. We helped them in Libya as well, but when a few American’s decided to spill the beans on the weapons transfers, they got whacked. Why do you think no one went to help them? They are still lying about Benghazi. But let’s all believe that Al Qaeda is out to get us and let the NSA spy on all of us, because we need them to spy on us to keep us safe from the boogieman that they invented and control. I can solve the terrorist problem very quickly, we don’t need the Fed’s. 😉

      • Hmmm.
        I think your Russian claim isn’t true.

        In 1940, Russia had 2.5 million man army in 200 divisions

        By 1945, Russia had over 6.5 million men in over 500 divisions and 50 tank divisions in their Armed Forces – by far larger then all other nations combined.

        They were absolutely ready to take all of Europe, who were saved by the threat of nuclear weapons that had just been revealed in the massacre at Japan.

        • By 1945, Russia had over 6.5 million men in over 500 divisions and 50 tank divisions in their Armed Forces – by far larger then all other nations combined.

          Strange. Why didn’t they finish off Hitler then? They were closer and heavily outnumbered our forces, yet, they can’t take Berlin? Something is very fuzzy about that, but for the sake of the discussion, how many would have walked away rather than become the second invading force in Europe? I would guess most joined to protect Russia, not take over Europe. But, that’s not really the subject anyway, it’s about a false boogieman used as a scare tactic to destroy liberty. I’d rather argue over today’s issue than the many different versions of history. 🙂

          • Woohoo! Vindicated by the Flagster!!!! Russia had the manpower. Right after the war, I doubt they had the industry, we were propping them up. If it came to all out conflict, I think we could/would have won because of our industrial might. Yes, it took many brave men, but nearly every country has it’s supply of brave men. Who has the most, best bullets along with those brave men are the last standing. Economics of warfare.

            Back to my point, I can agree with you on most points except there was a “Cold War” and Russia had a leading role in it’s creation. I do not excuse the USA for many mistakes, even sins. But some of it was real and an isolationist USA likely would have left much of Europe under the yoke of “communism”. I think Russia would have acted like the new Rome, conquer & expand to support the mother country. A rape & pillage economy…

            • Fair enough, let’s move to present times. What gives now?

              • I would say economic advantage. China wants ALL the resources in what it claims are it’s sea’s. This puts them in direct conflict with Japan, S.Korea & the Philippines. Russia sold them an aircraft carrier. That doesn’t make them friends, but they may support each other to gain advantage over the US.

                The “Cold War” was mostly real. There was a threat, not of invasion of the USA, but of Russian expansion thru conquest. The US countered that threat. Now we face new threats, such as China’s new power. Funny thing, it seems so often we create our own monsters.

                “As a country, we are guilty, just as much as Russia and China, for trying to push our political views on others. Do we really need to continue down that path?

                Back to the boogieman. Our current boogieman, Al Qaeda, is a fabrication of the CIA and funded by them. ”

                No, we need to move toward a “peace thru strength” posture. Be that biggest gorilla and own it! But, you don’t ever say there is a “Red Line” unless you mean it is the point where you commit our country to waging war. Words have meaning, such as Bush’s support of Georgia. That didn’t work out so well…

                “Our current boogieman, Al Qaeda, is a fabrication of the CIA and funded by them. ”
                Sorry but I don’t buy that about the CIA. And as I see it, it doesn’t matter. There are over a billion Muslims in the world. At least one percent are “radical’, and a threat to us and nearly everyone within their reach. That is reality, there is a “threat”.

                Our government has shown they cannot protect us from these threats, but they still insist they can/will with only a little bit more power & funding. Our government is trying to shift our culture into one of total dependence. Our security from this and all the other minor (what are the odds of anyone being a victim of violence?) threats always have been & always will be self reliance. Government can’t, we can.

            • ” I doubt they had the industry, we were propping them up”

              You jest!

              Stalin -in a rare intellectual genius- had disassembled most of his manufacturing capability, quite literally brick by brick, and moved them to the Urals to save them from the Germans. This incredible feat not only saved its manufacturing ability, but unlike other European powers, put it out of range of German Air power to bomb and destroy. In this, Russia was as powerfully productive as American industry – immune to bombing.

              The Russians outproduced every warring nation, including the US, in men and materials.

              The Russians had more men, more tanks, more artillery, more aircraft than all other warring nations combined. Only in the navy did the US dominate.

              • PS: They also had more losses then any other nation.
                Indeed, they probably suffered the greatest number of losses and death of one people in the entire history of human warfare.

              • I was not jesting, more like just wrong??? I would still give the edge to the US had it come to conflict, but it was a battle neither wanted to fight. More likely it would have broken both countries…But what I recall from history, the US sent a substantial amount of material aid to Russia & that it was enough to affect their survival.

              • I would not just give an edge to the US, but absolutely would have won.

                US had nukes, Russians did not.
                Checkmate.

              • Oh, yes, early in the war the Lend Lease was vital to Russia, no doubt.

                But after 1943, it was wholly unnecessary. Stalin had save the production power of his nation and the pittance of the Lend Lease was trivial after that. It was more of capturing American war machine engineering that was then introduced into indigenous Russian war machines.

                One merely needs to follow the development of the Russian aircraft. After 1944, the Russian fighters had similar capabilities to the best of the Americans had. Believe me, the Russians didn’t “invent” them.

          • “Strange. Why didn’t they finish off Hitler then? They were closer and heavily outnumbered our forces, yet, they can’t take Berlin?”

            Russians did take Berlin and beyond!

            They took Berlin and most of Germany and continued to assault to the border of Denmark in the North. Western Allies fought like hell to beat them to Denmark. Western Allied troops made it to incredibly vital port of Kiel, at the border of Denmark …. and stopped. Kiel was vital as it has a canal that links the North and Baltic seas. Beyond here there was no point to take territory, all the key Atlantic ports were in Western Allied hands.

            Why do you think the Allies concentrated most of their efforts along the North Sea coast of Europe? It was a race to seize the ports so to deny the Russians those ports.

            The “Great Game”, at play since the rise of the British Empire in the 19th century, has been to deny Russia port access to the Atlantic.

            Russia with Atlantic (ice free) ports would allow an incredibly large and powerful country that has more resources then the rest of the world access to vast trade routes. British/American economic rule would be vacated.

            Still today!! this is the game. The frantic wringing of hands in Syria when Syria opened here ports to Russian warships still exposes this game, for example.

            Almost every global major conflict since the 1800’s has been to bottle up Russia and/or Germany – all due to the tremendous economic threat these peoples had/have on then the British and now the American economic hegemony.

            • Dale A. Albrecht says:

              I have a great political cartoon to that effect. I need to find it and figure out how to post it. The cartoon is when Nixon was still president and the Russians were trying to get access into the Mediterranean and beyond, through the Black Sea and the Bosporus. The cartoon shows and US 7th fleet admiral and a Russian admiral sitting in a bathtub labeled “Mediterranean” with all their little ships in the water. Standing over them was Nixon saying to the Russians, “Let me remind you, we were here first”

            • Good morning, BF….been away for awhile…

              ” Why do you think the Allies concentrated most of their efforts along the North Sea coast of Europe? It was a race to seize the ports so to deny the Russians those ports.”

              Almost all the “historians” reject this FACT….it is probably the most important of the reasons that the US entered the war. The US understood that Germany could never take the Russians…..even with their might. Immense expands of lands and winters and supply lines doom any major advance of Germany combined with the fact that in order to actally take AND HOLD Russia would have exhausted most of the German military.

              ” Almost every global major conflict since the 1800′s has been to bottle up Russia and/or Germany – all due to the tremendous economic threat these peoples had/have on then the British and now the American economic hegemony.”

              You are quite correct in this hypothesis….however, I do not think that Russia currently has the economic power to do very much..as it stands today. The world currencies are in too much turmoil. ( Euro and the Yen for example )….Germany is still a huge economic power in Europe and isn’t it interesting that despite the huge losses and setbacks of the last century, they are still hugely powerful. If Germany folds, Europe folds.

              • JAC,

                Yep – any actual reading of Western Allied strategy reveals the “Race along the Coast” and its reasons.

                In 1942/43, the Western Allies were playing in the Mediterranean – they had “no worries” about the Eastern War and were content to watch Germany and Russia bleed each other to death.

                But after the Stalingrad debacle, the speed at which the Russian army pushed back the Germans astounded the Western Allies into an “oh oh”.

                Suddenly the Med campaign went “back burner” and then Normandy et al went full bore.

                They brought back Patton and Montgomery to make up lost time, and -just barely- beat the Russians to Kiel.

                Just think if the Battle of the Bugle delayed the Western Allies by a month more…. we’d -still today I propose- be seeing Russian control of Germany and her ports would be flying some sort of Russian flag.

              • Do not under-estimate the economic power of Russia …. it is staggering.

                There are only two “saving” graces (if you think a economically strong Russia is a “bad” thing) that holds them back.

                No ice free ports
                Russians have a knack of kicking themselves in the head politically.

                One of my best friends is Russian-born. He even shakes his head at his own peoples saying “Russians seems to love tyrants”

    • Shaw? Showing your redneck again Mr Illusion? 🙂 🙂

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      LOI…..The situation in Iran in the early 50’s was a tab bit more complicated than is the conventional wisdom or totally false revisionist history.
      The Shah’s father was deposed after WWII by a joint Anglo-Soviet coup. I’ll go out on a limb and say, it was his pro-nazi support that drove that coup. His son succeeded to the throne after the coup. The monarchy had become much like Great Britain with the Shah and a democratically elected, for the sake of discussion, parliment. Mohammad Mosaddegh was the elected prime minister from 1951 – 1953 when he was ousted from office by the operation called Ajax, and MI6 and CIA operation. Mosaddegh was wanting to nationalize the oil production in Iran. The Shah opposed it at the time claiming won’t be cool if we severe the contracts, plus we do not have the skills to manage the oil production. The Shah was NOT ever out of his role as monarch and therefore not ever reinstalled by the CIA. Mosaddegh was taking more and more power of areas reserved for the Shah, appointing ministers and cutting his allowances etc. He was the one who was over stepping his role as PM. Yes, he was deposed from power by the operation Ajax in 1953 and another PM was appointed. The US got involved mostly because the Brits convinced us to do so by claiming much of Mosaddegh’s power was being provided by the Iranian communist party, Tudeh, who were controlled by Moscow. Bottom line the driving force of the coup were the British and their anger over losing control of the Iranian oil that they enjoyed since 1913……leap ahead to 1973….Yom Kippur War time frame and I’m sure you all remember the oil embargo’s etc. In 1973 both the Shah and King Faisal from Saudi Arabia were making moves to again nationalize the oil production in their countries and not have the profits go to foreign controling interests. To make this simple, March 1975 Faisal was assasinated and the Saudi’s whether they nationalized or not brought their prices down to agreeable level to the west. Khalid the successor to Faisal tried pressuring the Shah to back down his desire to have more control of their own resources. The US withdrew their support and his rule ended in Jan 1979. OPEC got the message and prices of oil remained fairly stable for quite a few years until the 90’s. While all the folks in NY were sitting in gas lines with the embargo starting in Oct 1973, I flew in from overseas into JFK and while on the approach to the airport as far as you could see, there were fully laden oil tankers at anchor just out side of our continental limits….its 0220 EST and I’ll sign off, because there is another side to the embargo and subsequent increase in oil prices relating to the end of the conflict in Vietnam, which may seem unrelated but are.

      • “Bottom line the driving force of the coup were the British and their anger over losing control of the Iranian oil that they enjoyed since 1913……”

        Great post! Mostly I agree, but wasn’t there some long, drawn out hostage situation? My point is the US got most of the blame and is nearly universally resented in the Middle East for our meddling in their affairs(like destroying Israel). We are “The Great Satan”!

        I think here today we should look at Egypt, Libya & Syria and ask, did US policy work to advance US interest? I can’t see that it did. Therefore that policy should be re-thought. mainly stay out of it, unless you believe you can take sides between two hornet’s nests fighting.

        • LOI, we used our Air Power over Libya, we control the Egyptian military and we are giving weapons and aid to Syrian rebels. US policy is certainly trying to advance US interest in these countries. It’s all about money gas and oil. It’s always about money, which is said to be the root of all evil 👿

          • NO!

            Money is not the root of evil at all. Money is the very reason you can live. To declare money is evil makes your life evil.

            CONTROL others is the root of all evil.

            Syrian issue is not about money, but about CONTROL of the politcal and economic choices within that region.

            It is so absolutely dangerous to conceptualize MONEY as the problem.

            You end up replacing the reality of the issue with a dogmatic, yet incredibly dangerous, misunderstanding of politics and economics.

          • I can’t see that by the results. Name a M.E.country more stable since the Arab Spring?
            My answer would be Iran. When they had an uprising, we were mostly silent. Everywhere else we tried to influence or acted has increased the instability with no positive results for the US.

            • It’s very early to want results. This will take time, but the UN now controls Libyan oil, something China wanted. Syria is ongoing, and I still haven’t figured out Egypt yet, may BF can help with that 🙂

  9. For those who still chose to vote in Federal elections. If you haven’t noticed, we have all been told who will be running for President in 2016, long before the fake Primaries. In the Left corner, as a pure globalist and liberal progressive, it’s Hillary Clinton. In the Right corner, we have a heavy closet liberal who is faking his true intentions, welcome Chris Cristie, current Governor of the 48th worst run state in the US. Those are your choices, as has already been decided, PEACE 😎

  10. Just A Citizen says:

    Kathy and Anita

    OK, I already admitted to the error of my prediction regarding the Lions and now it includes the Packers.

    HOWEVER, my prediction was that Detroit would make the playoffs at near 8 and 8 and the Packers could not win without Rogers.

    So my failure was predicting a COMPLETE LION collapse. Otherwise that prediction would have been dead on. And of course the Bears and Vikings couldn’t put the division away before Rogers returned.

    Other predictions:

    Carolina wins their division. Saints did get in but by the skin of their teeth.

    Seattle DID LOSE two more games and came close to blowing the division champ and home field.

    New Prediction: The 49rs have the same result this year against the Pack as they had last year.

    • Happy New year JAC! Glad to see your travels were safe for you and your family 🙂

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Happy New Year back at you G.

        Lots of FOG………….and more FOG.

        Did get about three days of sun.

        Announcement: New GRAND DAUGHTER born on same day as my Daughter. Christmas season just got even crazier.

        • Oh sure! Rub salt in the wound. You didn’t have to SHOUT about the COMPLETE LION collapse! However! William Clay Ford must have heard your call for a new coach. Later Jim Schwartz.

          Congratulations Grandpa! Your first if I recall? It’s going to be a blast. Enjoy!

        • Judy Sabatini says:

          Congratulations on your new granddaughter JAC, is she your first grand child? If so, welcome to the grandparent club, you’re going to love it, I’ve been one for 3 months now, a granddaughter her as well.

        • Congratulations Gpa JAC! How exciting!

          And since Green Bay seems to have minimal defensive ability (especially without Clay Mathews), I would tend to agree that the Niners will win. The bookies in Vegas are seeing it differently, however……

  11. If you read “State of Fear” by Michael Chrichton, he explains the title at the end of the book. The book is about AGW. Basically with the end of the Cold War, newspapers had very little fodder to keep people riled up so they jumped on AGW and hyped it to increase readership. Nothing like a good boogeyman to sell newspapers. Of course the government goes right along as it is also a good method of uniting the people and covering up for many other problems. The Arabs use us as the boogeyman to keep their people in line. Unfortunately, we are too stupid not to step in the BS they throw on the ground.

    As for attacking the Russians at the end of WWII, I think you would find that the US population was so war weary that such a move would have been a political disaster unless the Russians provided some clear provocation.

    The unfortunate part is that we continued to prop them up even after the war. Dad took a job with a local implement dealer after he got discharged. Most of the farm machinery by 1946 was old and wore out. One returning vet took over the family farm and ordered a new tractor. Spring planting was fast approaching but no tractors were being delivered. So Dad was ordered to take the dealer’s truck to Racine and not come back without a tractor. When he got there, he was told that none were available. Out the corporate office windows he could see hundreds of tractors being loaded on rail cars. When he asked where these were going, he was told Russia. I am sure the Sgt in him came out and a few new rear end orifices were created. He left with a tractor that night.

  12. Just A Citizen says:

    OK, lets deal with this Cold War argument, but from a different angle.

    Assuming that WE, as in Americans, do in fact have Freedom, Liberty and Justice as our CORE Principles.

    Thus Communism in all its forms is Antithetical to OUR CORE PRINCIPLES.

    Communism is being spread by various means around the world. Some by force and others by populist revolts or elections.

    WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT IT?????

    Please provide some proof you idea of what to do will achieve its objective. Whatever that may be.

    Obviously this is the situation our Fathers found themselves in in the last century. They did what they thought was best. We now have the benefit of over 75 years of history to use as our guide.

    Let’s see what you can come up with.

    • Let’s not assume, change Communism with Socialism (mostly the same thing, but in today’s terms of understanding) and then let’s visit what is currently being done. Let’s start with the NSA and it’s true purpose. Snowden blew the whistle on the NSA spying on the people, but the NSA has become so big, like the Feds as a whole, we just can’t demand they go away. Some are filing lawsuits, some are thinking they have nothing to hide (the SO WHAT mentality) and the rest are oblivious to all of it.

      So, we are now facing the encroachment of socialism (Communism) in our generation. Did the previous generation(s) fail? I’ll be considering further ideas and will post them after more coffee 🙂

      • Labeling different politics “fascist, communist, socialist” etc. is really non sequitur.

        There are two political thoughts that polarize.

        Those that impose and those that do not impose.

        Fascist Social Communists, which dominate nearly every sphere of politics can be seen to be “Centralized Command and Control” of the population for, generally, economic reasons.

        Look, no sane person at either pole of State vs Anti-State thinks murder is a good thing, nor theft, nor assault, etc. When someone argues for government, however, they obscure their real principle by using these vile events as the reason for government – yet, that is not what government for 99% of its effort actually cares about.

        99% of all government law are dictates upon economic freedoms.

        War on Drugs is an economic interference.
        War on Prostitution is an economic interference.
        Import bans is an economic interference.
        Prohibiting immigration of peoples is an economic interference.
        Patents and Copyrights is an economic interference.
        ..so on and so forth.

        When debating whether “this guy is fascist or communist” is irrelevant. He is a “Statist”
        When debating whether this guy is a “Republican or Democrat” is irrelevant. He is a “Statist”

        Both declare the State must Command and Control the personal free economic choices of the people – what they wish to control maybe different, but the fundamental principle both operate upon is exactly the same.

        There is exactly two types of thinking people – one side believes the State should intervene to control the economic action of the people and the other side believes it should not.

    • We do nothing.

      Every one has a right to chose their own means of their own lives. If people want Communism, go for it.

      Most of what was the “Anti-communist” rhetoric was in fact merely popular indegionous movements of self-rule.

      But Eisenhower doctrine – the Sith doctrine – “If you are not with us, you are against us” made these movements into an existential threat .

      • The problem I see with your method is that many of us end up being forced to live as the Communist’s choose. Believe me, I can live happy ever after where am at and what I’m doing. I don’t believe that I should have to work hard to pay for other existence. That is what Communism will likely bring. Although admittedly, my abilities to do more than ranting online at this moment are quite limited, waking people up to this possibility is action. You’ll have to do some convincing on the “do nothing” doctrine.

        Happy New Year to you and the Family Flagster! 🙂

        • Do not group yourself in the word “us” or “we”. That is an incredibly dangerous mental perversion. It badly distorts your own situation and world view.

          There is just “you”.

          What someone else chooses for themselves is irrelevant to the you.
          If they impose that upon you, that is very relevant to the you.

          Communism in China does not impose upon you.
          Armed fascists in America do impose upon you.

          Your focus, therefore, should care nothing about China, and really fight against your fascist neighbor with gun to your head.

          • I understand your point. There are many like minded people like me, who wants government out of my/our business. I believe you are one of them 🙂 My concern is my freedom at my home in my country. I extend my concerns for others who are like minded and even those who are oblivious to what’s going on around them. In a sense, I’m pushing back against impostion enacted by those who want government control of their lives and most important, want to push their desired control on me and in my life.

            I suppose what I’m saying is that freedom is worth fighting for. Sitting back idle and being consumed by forced slavery is not in my DNA 😎

            • The point is whose freedom are you thinking you are fighting for?

              This constant concentration of this blog on international and national affairs is a terrible distraction to your goal.

              You cannot get your freedom by fighting the Chinese.
              You will not get your freedom by promoting federal political action.

              The laws that most effect you are local. 90% the laws that you deal with daily are local laws.
              Here is where you can make a difference.

              Forget the distractions, focus on where you can make an impact.

              Look, legalization of pot did not occur nationally.
              It did not occur in any State legislature, initially.

              It occurred, first, LOCALLY.
              Then accepted STATE-wide.
              Now the debate is National.

              The legalization of same-sex marriage did not occur nationally.
              It did not occur from any State legislature.
              It occurred, first, LOCALLY.
              Then accepted State-wide.
              Now the debate is National.

              The most powerful political body, today, is civic power.
              Your city can, quite legally, ban the federal government. It can make a bylaw that prohibits any federal organization by simply prohibiting its ownership, rent or lease of any property within city limits. That simple.

              ALL REAL political power is local.
              Do not get the flow of political power backwards, which this blog has a very high tendency to do.

    • JAC,

      #1, self interest. We do not want to fight another world war.

      “Communism is being spread by various means around the world. Some by force and others by populist revolts or elections.”

      If by outside force, it may be in our best interests to oppose a Russia or China effort to expand thru conquest. Also a Muslim nation bent on expansion thru conquest might require a response. I would prefer to supply arms to an Allie, not get caught up in their war. If it’s internal, we should stay out of it and try & maintain peaceful relations with the government they choose. Staying out of it would also mean not supplying arms. Problem would then be China/Russia supplying arms to their side. Damn, seems like we’ve been there before. Embargo?

  13. Just A Citizen says:

    Not hacking for the book but found the description of Fascism as relevant to past discussions we have had on the subject. Namely that the USA has assumed a FASCIST system far more than a capitalist system. Yet the left wing hacks, ala, Chomsky, continue to try and vilify Capitalism as the problem.

    “Fascism vs. Capitalism: The Central Ideological Conflict of Our Times

    “Fascism” has become a term of general derision and rebuke. It is tossed casually in the direction of anything a critic happens to dislike.

    But fascism is a real political and economic concept, not a stick with which to beat opponents arbitrarily. The abuse of this important word undermines its true value as a term referring to a very real phenomenon, and one whose spirit lives on even now.

    Fascism is a specific ideology based on the idea that the state is the ideal organization for realizing a society’s and an individual’s potential economically, socially, and even spiritually.

    The state, for the fascist, is the instrument by which the people’s common destiny is realized, and in which the potential for greatness is to be found. Individual rights, and the individual himself, are strictly subordinate to the state’s great and glorious goals for the nation. In foreign affairs, the fascist attitude is reflected in a belligerent chauvinism, a contempt for other peoples, and a society-wide reverence for soldiers and the martial virtues.

    Lew Rockwell, in this new volume, examines the starkly contrasting systems of capitalism and fascism, noting pro-fascist trends in recent decades as well as the larger historical trends in the United States and internationally.

    In Section One, Rockwell focuses on the nature of fascism and its influence in Western society, with a focus on American political and economic institutions.

    In Section Two, Rockwell examines capitalism as the enemy of, and antidote to fascism.

    Combining economics, history, and political philosophy, this book doesn’t just provide a diagnosis of what ails American and Western society, but also sheds light on how we might repair the damage that has been done, and with the help of the intellectual work of great minds like Murray Rothbard and Ron Paul, we might as a society shed the fascism of our times and look to freedom instead.

  14. Just A Citizen says:

    Nice little tribute to the Midshipmen Seniors who WON their bowl game today.

    http://t.foxsports.msn.com/they-just-played-their-final-game-and-will-now-go-serve-our-country

  15. Just A Citizen says:

    Seems to me this “Just One Minute” poster was reading Mathius’s comments on SUFA about Mr. Robetson. From American Thinker:

    “A&E’s statement of surrender remains, however, a testament to the continuing cluelessness of media executives:

    “After discussions with the Robertson family, as well as consulting with numerous advocacy groups, A&E has decided to resume filming Duck Dynasty later this spring with the entire Robertson Family. We will also use this moment to launch a national public service campaign promoting unity, tolerance and acceptance among all people.”

    Just One Minute poster “Ignatz” nailed the point:

    “Unity, tolerance and acceptance”–
    Could you get any more Orwellian?
    Unity = unity of thought.
    Tolerance = intolerance of a lack of unity of thought.
    Acceptance = rejection of anyone who refuses to unify their thoughts with the collective.”

    • You failed the final exam. Six more months of re-education for you. Report back to camp.

    • At the core of it is a recognition and respect for individualism, individual free will and rights.

      We are all equal individuals with individual minds and bodies, thus we have free will, a rightful individual choice to self determination, to choose, practice, express and/or celebrate our beliefs and values system, ..so long as it does not violate the rights of others.

      Tolerance comes with a respect for individual rights, and promotes self awareness, understanding, etc..

      As has been recently demonstrated, people are obviously sensitive about issues regarding race, religion, lifestyle, etc. Maybe a message of tolerance isn’t so bad.

  16. WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT IT?????

    Please provide some proof you idea of what to do will achieve its objective. Whatever that may be.

    Obviously this is the situation our Fathers found themselves in in the last century. They did what they thought was best. We now have the benefit of over 75 years of history to use as our guide.

    Let’s see what you can come up with.

    JAC, We remove the current government, rewrite the Constitution for the sole purpose of further limitations, severely limit amounts of money used in future election campaigns and hold a new election at the Federal level, Repeat at State level if needed and so on.

    This shuts down the spread of Socialism at the top and flows downhill. Then each State can consider anti-socialism laws. Notice I have given the states the power they should have today 🙂 Let’s start here and go from there 😉

  17. Ladies, some video’s on where to carry your concealed weapon. Guy’s, you are just being sexist pigs (happily including myself), third post down at :
    http://johnrlott.blogspot.com/

    Also some great articles/info

  18. Gman,

    There is a great book that -of course- I can’t remember the exact title of, but brilliantly articulates this.

    The Founders built the nation, not top down, but ground up.
    The State gave the Federal government its power, not the other way around. It was a grant (or more like, a loan) of their power to the Federal government to act in a very small, defined arena.

    Read the Constitution and this fact it is absolutely apparent.

    But what was not so written in the Constitution directly was where the State got its power. This was because, in that time, it was NATURALLY assumed.

    The State got its powers by a grant from the county. The county granted (more like a loan) to the State to act in a very defined arena. Review the (original) State charters and this is absolutely apparent.

    The county got its power by a grant direct from the representation of the people in that county.

    The founders lived and acted in this political world and found it unnecessary to articulate it very much in the Federal documents because THIS IS HOW AMERICA FUNCTIONED since 1607.

    There was no need to document a national fact that everyone in America – and I mean everyone – operated within.

    • I’m totally in agreement! Also very aware that the federal government should be very limited, which they are not. Locally, I’m fine. I watch, listen and act if need be, but so far, those who represent also feel the same way, stay out of peoples business. 🙂

      I’m in the “just say no” to the Federal governments interference in my life. I do not vote in their elections, and have removed MY consent to be governed by them. I have also written the local Congressman and stated such (did not get a response). 🙂

      • Look, if you have a NATIONAL issue, fight it locally.

        Federal Gun laws, for example. Counties, and then the States, have made laws that ignore it.

        Remember 55mph?
        What did North Dakota do? Simply made a law that aborted it. Done.

        If you have a national issue that concerns you, fight it locally. Simply advocate and work for local laws that abort the national law. Doing this undermines the foundation of the national law. If no one locally enforces those national laws, what good are they?

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Black Flag…..If I remember correctly, States did not have to adhere to the Federal 55 mph mandate. If they chose not to post and enforce the “law” all a State stood to lose was Federal monies in support of those roads. If they could do without the money, so be it, there really wasn’t anything the Feds could do about enforcement beyond withholding funds anyway. Hummm…..they took the money from the people in the State anyway, then turn around and blackmail the people into submission if you wanted your money returned. Extortion and coersion come to mind. Illegal if we the people do it, but legalized behavior by the government to do violence on the people.

          • Yep, that is the basic tactic of most Federal Law – agree, you get your money back, don’t we keep it.

            But as Montana did (sorry, I said ND, but it wasn’t) – they were clever enough to post the law, and then ignore it.

            Going faster then 55mph, you might get a $5 ticket of “polluting the environment”, paid to the officer on the spot!

            🙂

            • Dale A. Albrecht says:

              Wouldn’t the officers just settle for a beer after their shift? The education system is such a good example here. The States do not have to comply with the Feds, except they’ve got themselves in such a deep hole from being bribed and complying in the past they feel they can not refuse the “mandates” today. Digging the hole even deeper.

              The other year the NC State transportation department built a divider right down through the center of Havelock NC. Used to be a continuous center turn lane. The town objected strenuously and the State still stuck it to them. 1st a vehicle with a trailor, and there are a lot here with the boating could not turn into a business, much less make a U-turn. To get to the Dunkin Donuts for example you now had to drive at least one mile to get back to the place you were at when you decided a cup of coffee was needed. Not only time, but more gas consumed and pollution created. There was a measurable drop in business of close to 40% on both sides of this divider. Then the State cavalierly (sp) announced they were resurrecting a 1970 highway plan to speed traffic to the port in Morehead City. This would by-pass the city entirely, cutting through Croatan National Forest with at least a 500 ft wide swath. Now destroying beautiful forest and delicate ecosystems. Go figure. The highway to the port was never completed years ago for the simple reason ships sizes outgrew the ports capability. The port could never be built up in anyway, Besides that there was a perfectly good rail system in place. The State then targeted Morehead City to divide the road through town. Citing accidents in the turn lane as unexceptible and the public safety demanded the barrier. The city challenged the traffic incidents and the State refused to provide the records. The city had theirs. I’ve routinely driven the road and have NEVER in 18 years seen an accident in the center turn lane. At intersections YES, someone turning right into a store and getting rear-ended YES by someone not paying attention behind them. The city said for the state to stick it and the plan died. The state under the recovery act always said, but if we don’t use the money we’ll lose it. The State went onto another project and wanted to build a sulfur processing plant at the port. Right smack in the middle of two communities who rely on tourism and fishing. 1st they were keeping it secret, and when leaked to the public, they said we don’t need your approval. This plant was to benefit a private corporation in Aurora NC. That corporation wanted to shorten their supply line obviously to reduce costs. Daily several trains 50 – 100 cars, with molten sulfur pass within 2 blocks from my house to go to the Aurora plant. The state said it was justified because the plant would hire 12 people. At the expense of how many hundreds of temporary and permanent workers in the tourist industry. Needless to say the city had to legally challenge the state for damages that would occur and the state backed down. Company claimed they’d have to move due to the costs, but after two years the trains are still coming through to the plant…..this should be cut and repeated in the new topic.

              • “Wouldn’t the officers just settle for a beer after their shift?”
                LoL! Probably!

                Yep, bribes – that always works on politicians, every time.

                Most people never wonder why I guy like Obama or Clinton enters public office as high-middle class or low-rich and ends their term stinky-filthy rich multimillionaires.

                I guess they got “outstanding” investment advice, right???

      • Look at Pot legalization.

        It all started locally when local law enforcement simply stopped enforcing national drug laws.
        As more and more local cops did this, the State found itself in a quandary. If the locals aren’t enforcing law, it undermines the theory of Law. So, how did it fix this?

        Sorta like “I am their leader. Tell me where my people are going so that I can lead them there”

        • That’s the way things should work, let the people decide locally what they want and don’t want. Don’t like it here, move over there, as you said. I like the leave me alone and I’ll leave you alone ideology. I should be able to make my own rules on my property, with no government denying my choices because some politician in California don’t like it and got a Federal law passed.

    • The whole way this worked was if you didn’t like the county you lived in (due to is political representation), you moved over one county where you did like its poltics. You still were close to your friends and family “over there” – an hour away, yet lived in the political environment that better suited yourself.

      The old “vote with your feet”.

      This adage however is often turned upside down by those that say “if you don’t like the NATIONAL government, you can always move to another COUNTRY”. No. There is are orders of magnitude difference changing COUNTRIES then COUNTIES.

      • That’s what I basically did a few years ago, except went a state away but still close enough to go visit by vehicle. I left Youngstown Ohio, a Democrat stronghold, and another cesspool full of crime and drugs. It seems like every place that is run by Democrats for a lengthy period of time turns out this way, a cesspool. Detroit, Chicago Cleveland and on and on. They want the Socialism crap, and it’s very easy to see the results of their leadership. That’s local politics in those areas. Youngstown was an impossible area to get into politics in any way, if you weren’t down with the Democrats, you were crushed, because they had the financial resources, aka, money, to maintain power and control. When the enemy, so to speak, has the money advantage, winning isn’t very likely. Just sayin 🙂

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Black Flag

        My old Pirate friend.

        I am afraid you have been misled again in your “interpretation” of history.

        The Counties did not form the larger branch, as in State. It was the STATE that CREATED the Counties.

        In the beginning it was in fact the chartered and identifiable “COLONIES” who created counties within the Colony. This practice continued under STATE Constitutions once we won our Independence from Mother England.

        From Wikipedia:

        History[edit]

        Counties were among the earliest units of local government established in the Thirteen Colonies that would become the United States. Virginia created the first counties in order to ease the administrative workload in Jamestown. The House of Burgesses divided the colony first into four “incorporations” in 1617 and finally into eight shires (or counties) in 1634: James City, Henrico, Charles City, Charles River, Warrosquyoake, Accomac, Elizabeth City, and Warwick River.[3] America’s oldest intact county court records can be found at Eastville, Virginia, in Northampton (originally Accomac) County, dating to 1632.[4] Maryland established its first county, St. Mary’s, in 1637, and Massachusetts followed in 1643. Pennsylvania and New York delegated significant power and responsibility from state government to county governments, and thereby established a pattern for most of the United States, although counties remained relatively weak in New England.[5]

        When independence came, “the framers of the Constitution did not provide for local governments. Rather, they left the matter to the states. Subsequently, early state constitutions generally conceptualized county government as an arm of the state.” In the twentieth century, the role of local governments strengthened and “counties began providing an ever widening range of services”.[6]

        The newest county in the United States is the City and County of Broomfield, Colorado, established in 2001 as a consolidated city-county.[7][8] The newest county-equivalents are the Alaskan boroughs of Skagway established in 2007, Wrangell established in 2008, and Petersburg established in 2013.[9]”

        If you check the various State Constitutions and County charters I believe you will find the Counties are formed “under the authority” of the State. In most western States they are the only “designated” level of Govt by the State. The States’ also establish RULES for incorporation of towns and cities but the County has most of the say, WITHIN THE LIMITS ESTABLISHED BY THE STATES.

        • Actually, JAC, you have to go back further.

          It was counties/communities that created the State, not the other way around,
          There were communities/counties before there was any “State”.

          Example:
          Delaware Statehood: December 7, 1787, Lower Counties on Delaware, i.e., the lower counties of Pennsylvania, then a sovereign State in Confederation

          • Dale A. Albrecht says:

            I’ve been trying to come up with an intelligent post so I can jump into the discussion that BF and Gman are having. As far as their discussion is going I have to be a typical “Libra” and unfortunately agree with both as far as their posts go.
            However, I really like Alexis de Tocqueville’s analysis chapters on “Despotism in Democratic Nations” He feels that even though the despotism will more than likely be soft, unlike the notion that all despotism is brutal, it is a tyranny none the less. He states in his analysis that the concept of “Equality” is the very mechanism that enables the huge centralization and apparently limitless use of power within the government forcing “Equality” throughout society down to the lowliest individual. He goes on to examine how we are will attempt to reconcile two very different and conflicting passions. The desire to be led, and the wish to remain free. The people console themselves by saying at least they chose the person who is now tugging the leads. Does “He may be a son of a B****, but he is at least our son of a B****” sound familiar? Every few years the people shake off their state of dependence just long enough to select their master and then relapse into it again. They feel that that they have done enough for the protection of individual freedom when they have surrendered it to the power of the nation at large. He really goes into how he feels that the people will eventually be incapable of exercising the great and only privilege which remains to them. They’ve introduced freedom and at the very same time are augmenting the despotism of their administrative constitution. To manage minor affairs in wish good sense is all that is wanted, the people are held to be unequal to the task; but when the government of the country is at stake, the people are invested with immense powers; they are alternately made the playthings of their rulers, and his masters, more than kings but less than men.
            I very liberally used de Tocquevilles words and phrases here, because I couldn’t say them better. He has many more points to make, but are to many to write about other than my suggesting to read the chapters concerning “Despotism in Democratic Nations” and “Continuation of the Preceding Chapters” I will attribute most of the above to Alexis de Tocqueville, though some phrases are my own.
            The ongoing argument about the Education Department created during Carter’s administration was challenged constitutionally, but upheld, by the “Commerce Clause”. We can see by the very words in the “Constitution” the powers, not realized or intended by the Founding Father’s future interpretations have brought a constant diminishing of our individual rights and freedoms and the seizure or forfeiture of States rights by the “Central Federal Government”. Promote the general welfare, provide for common defense, insure domestic tranquility etc. and using terms that all men are created equal implying the outcome must also be equal and social justice. The focus is unjustifiably on creating equality than on creating great things.
            Our education system instead of getting better is getting worse. We can only defend you by spying and collecting data on each and everyone, NSA. Promoting the general welfare with the ASA. Forcing commerce when there was no desire to trade or sell, commerce clause. All in the guise of fairness and equality.
            All these abuses of our freedoms and rights are being upheld by the very courts that are empowered with protecting the people from governmental over reach, by saying, well its constitutional. Enumerated rights being overridden by another clause. Right of privacy and warrantless general search ignored by saying we’re providing for your defense and it’s for your own good.

            • Good Evening Dale. The people are failing themselves, first by not paying attention and second by not doing anything when the government oversteps it’s limits of power. I am working on a new article concerning the discussion Black Flag and I have been having, mainly focusing on addressing the issues at a local level . In my never ending study of the Constitution, I think this article should be quite eye opening 🙂

              • ” The people are failing themselves, first by not paying attention and second by not doing anything when the government oversteps it’s limits of power. ”

                How long before a generation is born into complete enslavement?

                How close are we now?

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                Good evening Gman……I believe both of you believe the one has to start at the bottom to make change, not at the top. Referencing BF’s comments on marijauna use, enforcement and ultimate legalization. My experience with making change at the local level in a very small bedroom community in VT, where I lived got very hazardous to our lives for my ex-wife and myself. The “rice” bowls we wound up breaking involved multi-millions of dollars of corruption in the police and local board officials. The police were mostly all looking the other way on the drug trafficking coming down from Canada, the chief was proven to be taking bribes and graft. He actually sued the town for his dismissal and the “COURTS” sided with him. Not that the charges were unfounded, but that the town manager didn’t do the dismissal properly. We actually had to pay him back salary, punitive damages, rehire him, only to fire him again, but the second time it stuck. With that ultimate success the Colombians, with their little pony tails, Maserati’s, Ferrari’s and Lamborgini’s disappeared from town. The town counsel used to vote bonds to build roads, water and utilities and zoning changes to facilitate their own sub-divisions that they were building and selling. The State was also involved by approving some of the permits in less than 24 hours, whereas they normally took months of surveys and engineering analysis. A State owned a whey recycling plant on our lake that supplied much of our water village. The State was not only observed illegally dumping toxic wastes in the water, but also dumping the waste on the road with the valves open on the tanker trucks. The State EPA also pulled the monitors OUT of the lake that checked the water quality. Independently we took samples, submitted them to labs and the State had to not only shut down their recycling plant, but clean up the areas polluted by their dumping. My wife and I were written up in Time Magazine and on National TV for our battle with City Hall and the State. We were offered personal protection by the FBI and DEA because of all the corruption at the lower village level and state government that our investigations uncovered. The court costs were in the millions of dollars for our little village. We paid private police until the State provided troopers, We did get a whole new police force, new town councils, several times until the problem was resolved. It took several years. The battle has to come from multiple fronts by the people, not just the local level.

              • Now, I disagree wholly.

                It is not a matter that FBI supervises local cops, hence we need superior Federal force.
                If local cops are corrupt, move to the next city if you are unwilling to confront and change the local cops.

                The point, though, is the multi-front war.

                But such “wars” never work.

                To fight on “on all levels” means you are dispersed. You have limited resources and limited time. Flaying around in arenas such a Federal or even State politics is totally futile.

                First, to get into any sphere of influence there is beyond your ability. You need to be rich and very well connected or you are simply excluded. You are spitting in the wind. All your energy here is completely wasted, and lost.

                And lost is that energy and time where you CAN make a difference – especially where is far more important, far more powerful.

                Look, ALL politicians come from the local level, even the Federal ones. They all have districts they theoretically represent.

                If, locally, you find some creep politician that you don’t like, you hold him to the fire locally, in the local media. That will undermine any national politician over night. Trying to hold his feet to the fire on a national level, you won’t even get a sound bite published.

                ALL politics is local – and focusing on the local level is the most effective, powerful strategy.

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                To Black Flag…..We did NOT leave town, we fought locally and won. It was all grass roots. The corruption problems just happened to extend into State level also. The FBI and the DEA only offered protection due to the people we were targeting, the drug cartel, with investigations and corruption charges of the local police. The protection was refused. The issues were resolved, painfully but we did not ignore them by leaving. My thought of the battle being, multi-front is actually in agreement with you however badly I phrased it. All our representatives are elected locally, and either administer the government locally, at the State level or Federal levels. We do have to keep and eye on their actions and not go to sleep between elections, though. Employ the mechanisms of the ballot box and recall. Eventually, all tiers of the government will get the message.

              • re: Ballot box

                Pointless. Voting never changes anything.

                What does is public campaigns on topics of great embarrassment to the politician. Nothing like a minor scandal to derail any creep.

                Look at Canada or the UK, where -in the scheme of government funds- a few creeps submitted stuffed expenses, in amounts of a few thousands.

                Do the people argue about the billions of waste? No, because they cannot relate at all to what those numbers mean personally. “It just a lot” and they drop it.

                But some creep “steal” $1,000? Well, to the people that’s “Geez, I sure could use a grand too!” and they go all wild.

                Ridicule and embarrassment are the weapons, not a tick on piece of paper, IMO.

            • As usual, I can’t disagree with you.

              The challenge, I think, is very deep.

              The vast majority of people have no principles upon which to base their ethical choices. They mostly live under “what is good for me know” – claim “practicality” as their guide.

              So as long as the tyranny provides -in their eye- more goodies then not, they acquiesce.
              When it doesn’t they revolt.

              These same people do not understand morals vs evil. People think helping the poor, or feeding the hungry is “good” – which it is – and ethical -which it is not.

              Ethics and morals are those actions which confronts evil knowing evil will fight back.

              So they blindly support government seizure of their money to feed others, often arguing this is “moral action” in play, when in fact it is the resistance to the seizure of money that is the moral action.

              Confronting evil is the work of moral men – men who know there will be grave resistance in this confrontation.

              As vastly most people’s moral compass is twisted, because they have no principles, evil grows around them and they do not know why.

              • PS: To explain the difference between “doing good” and “having morals”.

                Feeding the hungry – a good thing- confronts no evil. There is no resistance or confrontation, not even from evil. No one is going to put a gun to your head and say “Make my day!”

                If one does (say in Africa) then, should you continue to feed the hungry IN SPITE OF the threat, that a very moral act.

                Hiding Jews in your basement, risking your own death, is a moral act.

                Just doing good is good, but the measure of your ethics is whether a person has the guts fight evil.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                “evil grows around them and they do not know why.”

                BF, could this be simply because they place their trust in government or the cultural “leaders” and simply believe those in power know best?

              • As I said later, it is because people have no principles.

              • It is also because they fall for the lies of the those who want power. The whole ideology of the Left is based on lies, period. The Right wing politicians are equally hollow in their words. Far to many are gullible to the propaganda and brainwashing they see and hear everyday. We are surrounded by evil, to few of us can actually see and understand that 😦

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                Progressive governments and their kind spend an enormous amount of time and energy destroying and ridiculing religion. I said religion to cover all religions. Religion is usually the one place that sets some sort of limit on moral behavior. The progressives by destroying their opposition, all boundries are removed and as you said, “The people have no moral compass”. Not that we didn’t have problems before, but the magnitude that they exist today is staggering. The montra of the Progressives is to “not let a good crisis go to waste” Even though they created the crisis, the aftermath enables them to pass more rules and regulations restricting the freedoms of the individual even more.

              • Suddenly we are on opposite sides!

                Religion provides no ethical training whatsoever. It provides dogma and rote.

                Ethics and morals is achieved by reasoning – a situation grossly lacking within religions.

                Just because someone in a funny hat and clothes waving a fictional story book says “This act is good” – and then one merely accepts it – is DANGEROUS to morals and ethics.

                Why is it good? What makes it good vs not good? Is it good under all circumstances or are there exceptions?

                Religion exists as slop for the unthinking and as history shows, it is merely a methodology of control no less than modern “patriotism” or “flag waving” (My country, right or wrong)

              • PS:
                There is no point in history no better or worse of people having principles. There have been noted individuals, but as society …. nope.

                We, today, probably approach the greatest level of moral society – there is less violence then ever, less poverty then ever and more knowledge and education – yet, the level today is still utterly dismal even with all this progress.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                People do have principles – unfortunately they select their “principles” from those they believe understand the problems (i.e government & cultural leaders). They adopt those beliefs and they become their principles, hence they no longer find it unreasonable whenever the power structure decides somethings needs to be done because it “protects” them from some “evil”.

                Children are taught a set of “principles” by their parents & family group – hence being taught early in life to leave the thinking to others (the “adults”). This in turn makes it much easier for the power structure to convince them of what their principles should be. Damn few realize they need to think, explore and question for themselves.

              • I do not believe that at all.

                You’ve been here at SUFA, and I have asked here that question here so often it now is the 11 Commandment.

                Buck/Mathius is a prime example – totally void, has no clue.

                Indeed, not to be insulting, I would say almost everyone here at SUFA except for a few notable individuals cannot -at all- articulate any principle of their lives, let alone admit they actually live by them.

                Even USWep was challenged to his core to find his, which he eventually did by practicing an exercise I gave him, and it changed him.

                Almost everyone is a “bubble head”, floating around where ever the wind of pragmatism takes them

              • Further, what is taught by authorities (parents, church, government, teachers) to children is not principles, they are told not to do or to do certain thing – not WHY you should do or do not.

                Don’t steal. Why?
                Don’t hit. Why?
                Don’t be cruel. Why?
                Pay your taxes. Why?
                Vote. Why?

                Their answer: “Because I told you so”.

                So the principle being taught is do what I say and don’t think for yourself? Nah.

                It’s called rote learning – acceptance of knowledge and fact without critical examination of the truth of it. With no tools of examination what is true evil gets thrown in with what may be a vital good, and you can’t tell the difference.

                See, principles are painful. It is very painful to confront evil because it fights back. But bad things tend to come back and hurt you too – like being cruel to others will make others cruel to you.

                So people learn “principles=pain” and “bad things=pain”, then Principles=bad thing.

                So out of the gate, people avoid them – misunderstanding that by NOT having principles, evil wins, and bad things happen

                But how are people to do this examination when people have zero philosophical education to know what “truth” is -philosophy being the only thing less known to common people then economics!.

              • Flag, care to share your little exercise?

              • It is on this blog in a dialogue with USWep a couple of years back.

                I will look for it for you.

              • Dale A. Albrecht says:

                Black Flag……on guiding principles and lessons learned. I do like using personal stories to make some of my points. When I was 5 years old my brother and I with two other neighbor boys, were out tramping in the Catskills. We came upon a barn, which to us was in the middle of no where and abandoned. We then proceded to break all the windows in the barn. When we got back home, it was after dark and when confronted by our parents about what we were doing, I let slip what we had done. Yes we were given a spanking but that was not where the lesson was learned about respecting other people and their property. Our parents found the very old lady who did own the barn. They took us to the bank where we had our birthday monies deposited. In my case it was $30.00 and my brother was $40.00. We had to go into the bank, alone, hand our deposit book to the teller, withdraw “ALL” we had in there. We were then taken to the old ladies house and dropped off. We then proceded up here driveway, knock on her door. Apologize for the damage we had done to her barn and hand her the money we had just withdrawn. That taught me and my brother a lifelong lesson. The two other boys, their father felt that it would humiliate his boys if they did that and he took care of the damages. We keep in touch over the years on both coasts, that is when they were not in reform school or jail for crimes commited to the society around them. Same event, different lesson taught, vastly different outcome.

              • plainlyspoken says:

                BF – Those “principles” children learn are nothing more than what you replied with. I agree, however this is what children (even you by your admission) have to base their beliefs on as we grow up. I argue that by the time they become an “adult” they have already been indoctrinated into the lifestyle of placing their beliefs in authority and accepting “principles” they (me included) have not bothered to reason out for ourselves.

                For a very long time I have read your postings and find myself thinking – even when not around – of your explanations, views, etc. They do challenge me. I just don’t seem to express myself anywhere near as well as you do.

                Do I have principles? Yes, I do and yet I recognize that I have contradictions in them, so they are not true principles. But, I do understand that and have been (especially once I started reading SUFA) to untangle those contradictions.

                For example, I too was in a position where I was prepared to wantonly kill other human beings just because the government told me to. I was prepared to accept an order to shoot an individual without knowing any reason why (as well as being willing to give such and order too). I was willing to stand by an let our “enemies” be nuked. Yet, I came to hate such thoughts and feelings. I am not a killer, especially of innocent beings, on the whims of others (especially government). Hell, I won’t hunt animals even – unless or until I need food for my family. I left the service and even in my law enforcement career I chose custody work because I didn’t want to kill others.

                Am I a better (and more principled) person? Yes, somewhat – yet I do recognize I still have contradictions to deal with – even in this “principle” – since I have for life supported the use of the death penalty (a contradiction I still struggle with).

                I think you will find many in my position (as you once were) here at SUFA. But, I try to take what I read here and elsewhere and use it for self examination.

                So you keep telling us, even though we may not agree with everything you say, and those of us willing to will work on our own self-examination.

              • Plainly,

                It is an excellent thing that you are struggling with your principles.

                Principles are those things that create struggles for us, otherwise, they are meaningless. They are supposed disturb us in ways that make us better.

                Principles are those things that make you stand firm, regardless how bad it hurts.

                Otherwise, you’d move to avoid pain – which most do – it is those principles that hold us in place regardless of the pain and suffering it causes upon us.

                If you are comfortable resting on your principles, you haven’t yet found your core principle.

                Look, Jesus died for his principles. He was executed for his belief, and refused to compromise them for anything, including his life.

                Gandhi died for his principles. He believed that Hindi and Buddhists must be equal. He was assassinated by a Hindi who believed Gandhi betrayed his own “people” by advocating for the Buddhists.

                Principles are the rock which you hold firm on, regardless of storms that try to dislodge us.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      LO(I) Nice clip. I was working off the coast of California doing oil exploration when # 7 on the list was underway. The Glomar Explorer was practicing and testing its retrieval methods and equipment while we were working there. I commented on day to one of the ships crew about how neat it would be to work on the ship, seeing that it was similar to the Glomar Challenger, an undersea exploration and mining ship. The crewman said “yeah right” you’ll need a security clearance so high to be on that ship and we can’t get near it when its in LA Harbor “a bunch of spooks” in the CIA terminology are running the ship. When they were working we couldn’t work due to the accustical interference they generated from the equipment operating on the oceans floor. Later we all found out exactly what they were up to when Jack Anderson broke the story.

  19. SUFA, As we say goodbye to 2013 and bring in 2014, I hope that each of you and your families can live happy, free, and healthy. HAPPY NEW YEAR to ALL!

  20. plainlyspoken says:

    Happy New Year to you all. I will be spending mine without my wife, who is in the hospital – her second night there.

    • I hate hospitals. Hope all is going well.

      • plainlyspoken says:

        Ditto! Things are slowly getting better. Tests determined that my wife’s liver enzymes were 5 to 8 times higher than the normal. An abdominal MRI determined that this is being caused by bowel reflux back into her liver – which I can tell you for my wife causes extreme pain, nausea, and vomiting. Apparently the condition can be caused by recent abdominal surgery (my wife had her gallbladder removed in Oct). The treatment: no food or liquids by month for 24 hours and she receives a medication through her IV. So hopefully she will get to come home tomorrow or Friday at the latest.

        @BF – ouch. Too cold for me. Reminds me of the days walking security behind C-5’s in the cold and snow of a Delaware winter oh soooo long ago. Temps here have been good since our last snow storm a couple weeks back. Even then temps only dipped down to the minus 15-20 degree range at night for 4 days.

        Thanks to you all for your best wishes. lol….I awoke this morning to my daughter telling me she has been vomiting since 4 am and doesn’t feel well. Seems she has gotten the stomach virus going around this part of Colorado of late. *sigh* Not the start to 2014 I wanted.

        So my friends – especially you BF – stay warm, stay healthy and GO Packers! 🙂

        • plainlyspoken says:

          oops – no food or liquid by mouth (not month).

        • Plainly, tell the Missus to get well soon and give that young’un some vitamin C in huge doses 🙂 I hope your 2014 is a big improvement over the last year or two. I agree, Go Packers!

          • plainlyspoken says:

            Thanks G. Just finished talking to the missus and she said the doc came in to see her and said that the MRI also shows some swelling in her small intestine at the base of her stomach, so tomorrow morning he is going to scope her and check it out. So, coming home tomorrow is out – guess I will hope for Friday now.

        • Prayers and good wishes. Once she’s past this & home, may want to look at her diet. May be things that aggravate now that were no issue before….

          • plainlyspoken says:

            Thank you LOI. You are right about the diet. We have suspected for a long time that my wife has celiac disease and needs to stay off gluten. She has followed a gluten free diet as much as she can, but no doctor could diagnose celiac disease UNLESS she returned to eating gluten and then they could test her and determine for sure if she has the disease. Well, now that can occur since she cheated some and had a couple of slices of pizza & some bread bites the night before this all started. Either way she & I had a “come to Jesus” meeting and she will not slip again.

            • Glad it looks to have a happy ending soon. This might be a blessing in the long run, the pain & hospital stay should scare her straight for a lifetime. We are struggling with my father-in-law who was hit with diabetes at 54 & has a hard time staying on his diet which lead to a stroke. You would think the permanent weakness in his left arm& leg would be a constant reminder, but it’s hard to break the habits you spent a lifetime developing…

              • plainlyspoken says:

                I can relate since I have diabetes as well. It’s tough sometimes to know I shouldn’t eat some of the things I do.

                As to my wife, she had an endoscopy this morning and it seems she had a partial closing of her stomach opening into her intestines, which the doc corrected. Some biopsies were taken and we await the results of those. She is feeling better and has managed to down two small cups of apple juice, two pop sickles and now is working on a cup of chicken broth.

                Though it looks like it will be tomorrow at the earliest before she can go home.

    • Happy New Year.

      I, too, am sans family, in -42 weather in dense fog (20 ft visibility) making sure oil feeds the USA.

    • Dang Plainly! You can’t catch a break, can you? Best wishes to you and your family for a better ’14.

    • Prayers and best wishes!

    • Listening as I type. Good song. Cold and snowy here this morning, forecast says single digits and below are on the way. Think I’ll get a pot of chile going and wait for my Spartans to take care of business tonight. Cheers BL!

  21. Anita, that chili sounds good 🙂 We have some cold coming our way too, along with 4-8 inches on snow tomorrow. 2 degrees tomorrow night, the high Friday, 9 degrees. Fairly normal weather though, nothing unusual.

  22. Judy Sabatini says:

    Just stopping in to say HI to all, & hope your New Years Eve & New Years Day has been good, Plainly, I really hope your wife gets on to recovery really soon. I’ll keep you both in my thoughts & prayers as well.

    I haven’t been on too much lately myself, my mom is in the hospital, well a rehab, but, not doing to well. She fell about a month ago or so, broke her hip, had to have surgery, was doing okay shortly after that, but, for the past week or 2, has been battling pneumonia several times. In fact, she has it again for the 3rd time. She’s been declining pretty fast & not sure how much longer she will be with us. Her body seems to be starting to shut down, hasn’t eaten anything for the last 2 days & she’s having trouble swallowing now, plus her heart has enlarged as well, so I have been spending a great deal of time with her everyday. I will keep you posted or GMAN can, he knows what’s going on, I’ve been keeping him posted on her & how she’s been doing since the beginning.

    I hope you all will have a good 2014, & hope everything will work out for everybody as well. May you all have love, joy & peace this new year.

    Take Care & miss you all so very much.

    Judy

    • Judy, So sorry to hear of your mother’s struggles and decline. You’ve been such a good daughter and caretaker – hoping for the best for her.

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Judy….sorry to hear of your Mother’s condition. Recently went through loss’s of both my parents. Take care and try and keep your spirits up……….Dale

    • plainlyspoken says:

      Thank you Judy. I am so sorry to hear about your Mom. Our best wishes and prayers will be with you both.

      • Judy Sabatini says:

        Thank you all for your kind words. I’m doing the best I can in this situation. Dale, I’m sorry to hear about the loss of both your parents as well, & hope you’re doing well. Yes, it’s hard & what makes it even worse is, is, the fact that she has Dementia as well. She knows who I am, but, doesn’t know who I am to her, she thinks I’m either her mother, her sister, or just some random relative, but, I know it’s not her fault comes with having Dementia. Going to go see her this morning & see if there is any changes in her. I forgot to mention, she’s in the final stages of COPD as well & that’s playing a big part in her decline. I will keep you all posted when I can. You all take care & hope everybody has a good day today.

  23. Hide the children!

    http://www.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/p/drink-up-bitches-and-sparty-on-2/

    WoooooooooooHoooooooooooo YEAH..YEAH YeeeeeHaw!

    Go Green!

  24. Dale, Down here 🙂

    Every Progressive country is mostly secular. They do not want a God, other than the government. Progressive ideology and desires are in opposition of the Constitution. They are not pro American, but simply pro government. They are followers and need leadership to give them the false sense of security. Without the power of government, they are mostly cowards. If someone don’t accept their ideology, they cry like little girls who had her lollipop stolen. Only progressives believe they can speak about their beliefs, all others should be silenced. They are the enemy of freedom. They are the anti-constitution. They are liars.

    Your battles with corruption are interesting. The drug trade is a billion dollar industry. If drugs were legal, you wouldn’t have had the problems you experienced. The war on drugs is itself corruption at the core. Make them all legal, the problems will soon be gone and the prisons will also slowly empty out. Crime will drop tremendously. That won’t happen, because there’s too much money to be had, by government.

    • p.s. I’m speaking of politicians, not the average sheeple. 🙂

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Gman…..I have not voted in years, due to my belief that voting is inherently pointless. Usually just voting on a different degree of corruption. I want at least a block that says, None of the above, to register my total disagreement and not be used as an excuse of laziness. Look at how many shady deals Reid and others were caught at. Not only were they not embarrassed into resigning, but got re-elected by their constituency. That is why I said in my long post, “…at least he’s our son of a B*****”. No principles and no morals, to your point. To BF’s point religions usually to me had a moral compass to guide you. They also promised to the faithful a mystical promise of life everlasting. Mostly BS. I subscribe to Mark Twain’s opinion that he would rather go to pergatory and not mend his ways, because if it’s for eternity, he’d rather be where the company is interesting. I believe, expecially the Catholic church leaders have completely lost all moral standing. Not only for the child abuse scandals, financial corruption, but to the most recent leader who DID NOT fight the evil fascist regimes in Argentina because it was not safe to do so. The churches in Europe did not fight the Nazis and Fascists so they could save themselves from the systematic extermination that was happening to the Jews and those peoples the governments deemed undesireable. BF says the measure of your ethics is having the guts to fight evil. Religion back when I was young gave me a moral compass and a strong ethical belief system that has not failed me in my lifetime so far. Made it difficult at times but there is a point I will not cross. I do not subscribe to any organized religion and have not attended religious services routinely except in the Navy, so I could catch up on sleep and when invited to a wedding or funeral.

      • I would in your case, Dale, suggest that the rote teaching of ethics by religion were then subsequently test by your reason.

        You discarded the ones that made no sense, and accepted the ones that did.

        But you could have gotten to the same place without religion. You would have done the same things in life learning – reason them out – to find your morals and ethics.

        • Dale A. Albrecht says:

          Isn’t it Jesus that said, “You had to know where the stones were” when he walked on water. Trying to bring some levity to this serious debate.

          We used to work 12 hour days for 2 full weeks with a week being 7 days and then had 1 week off in whatever port we came into, while I was working in the oil exploration business…..any job opportunities that I can jump into up your way in say 2 weeks? Slim pickings in Eastern Carolina.

          • Are you kidding??

            There is more work then men – most guys here are not from around here!

            Send email, let me know what you “do for a vocation” and let’s see.

            Remember, this is “real man” work up – middle of nowhere, cold most of the time, dirty, dangerous, lonely …..

  25. @Black Flag, Voting, can have some effect at the local levels, but I will certainly agree that it is pointless. The political parties run the show where they are in power. Fighting them is a very expensive undertaking, and basically pointless, since they also count the votes 🙄

    • Ah, back to agreement.

      Yes, voting for local politicians can be important, but no much

    • Dale A. Albrecht says:

      Just have to look no further than Al Franken’s win in Minnesota. After how many recounts, weeks later when it was appearing that Coleman was going to win by 250 votes, all of a sudden, boxes of votes showed up and coincidentally were all for Franken.

  26. ” a fictional story book ”

    Presuming you meant the bible, I assure you there is truth in there which also correlates to other holy books and teachings. I suspect DNA is one day going to prove so.

    It isn’t that the story is false, but rather people rejecting reason in favor of dogma, in favor of ‘what the preacher said’ over what the book says. …which is fine, of course, as people can/will follow/believe whatever they want. The issue is when people try to force it upon others under the false idea that ‘their way’ is superior. (but you already know that)

    The Holy Bible is one body, 2 testaments, 66 books, with 216 chapters in the new testament, 111 mentions of the word “church/churches”, and 318 mentions of the coming of Christ.

    I think it means the bible and the people are God’s temple, not necessarily a building with a preacher in it.

    …Just a thought.

    • Yes it is fictional, no more then “Hogan’s Heroes” is a true story about a WW2 prison of war camp.

      Because the venue may be a historical fact, the actors and circumstances don’t suddenly become fact.

      You can learn about human beings by reading Lord of the Rings too. Doesn’t make hobbits real.

  27. The great Hayek on principle:

    “The reason why I think that too deliberate striving for immediate usefulness (pragmatism) is so likely to corrupt the intellectual integrity of the [person] is that immediate usefulness depends almost entirely on influence, and influence is gained most easily by concessions to popular prejudice and adherence to existing political groups.

    I seriously believe that any such striving for popularity – at least til you have very definitely settled your own convictions, is fatal to the [person] and that above anything he must have the courage to be unpopular.”

  28. Now just a cotton pickin second there Mr.Flag.

    people on this blog can’t articulate their principles, let alone live by them

    Yet here I stand.admitting to the world that I cannot articulate my principles either. That does not mean that I live some scattered, meaningless life without boundaries. It just means that I’m not a micro thinker. I sit here and read this blog, learning volumes, but at the same time I shake my head because….you guys over think things to the point of creating a problem where none existed to begin with. I am a simple person. The thing that drives me is a desire to live on the good side as opposed to the evil side, I’ve always thought it’s much simpler to live ‘good’ than to live ‘evil’. Evil carries much baggage, I don’t have room for baggage in my simple life, oblivious to much of the busy ness of the world. I’m no Mother Teresa,but that doesn’t mean I have no principles. I may not be able to articulate them but that doesn’t mean they don’t guide me.

    back later

    • Good, get riled, Anita.

      You’ve dabbled comfortably as a “bubble head” for decades, and its about time to actually own your own mind.

      How do you know what is good and what is evil?
      You have no self-measuring stick other than what someone else put into your head.

      “Doing good” is good. But that is not “fighting evil”.
      Evil does “good” too, you know. That is why it holds so much darn power over people.

      Pick up a stick and beat a guy so he is forced to feed another. Well, feeding the hungry is good …. so people go “Well, that seems ok, huh?” … and evil grows.

      Evil is not just wanton slaughter, which is what most people easily point to … Evil at its worst and most powerful is subtle, discrete, enticing, sweet and often LOGICALLY consistent with itself.

      People are so easily folded into Evil’s schemes by such easy judgements of “doing good”.

      You have no principles, Anita, if you cannot tell anyone what they are and defend them with reason. How can you say they guide you when you can’t even speak what they are?

      It’s like claiming you are following a map, but the map is folded up in your pocket.
      Really, do you know where you are going then?
      How do you know you’re not lost and actually very far away of where you wanted to go?

    • Look, Anita, I’ve been there.

      As I related to USWep a few years back in a post here, I, too, was a very, very smart bubble head.

      I was well prepared to nuke Russian women and children – “Better dead then Red” attitude and fully believed heart and soul that was the right thing to do. Salute the flag!

      But something broke. I had traveled all over the place and saw, with my own eyes, that everyone is basically the same.

      They love their kids and would die for them.
      They wanted a better life for those kids then they had themselves.
      They worked hard at their jobs to provide for their families.
      They didn’t want to die.
      They didn’t want to kill me either.

      A serious contradiction in my brain, and I hate contradictions, so I began a very painful journey of self-discovery and test of my principles.

      And I found them badly wanting.

      It came down, finally, to either I ignore the contradiction and continue living a very successful, profitable, comfortable life or abandon that life and abide by my true core principle.

      I chose the latter.

      I lost my job. Can’t have a job killing people if you refuse to kill people.
      I lost all my friends. They thought I was nuts (still do).
      I lost my family. They thought I was nuts (eventually, love reconciled their opinion)
      I lost my wealth.
      I lost almost all my possessions.
      I was homeless living in a van, parked behind a whorehouse (the only place that didn’t care I was parked there) with all that was left of my past life, counting – quite literally- pennies so to buy a loaf of bread and peanut butter for supper.

      Living on my principles cost me nearly everything I had known.

      If you have not suffered such a cost, you have not confronted evil, and you have not lived by your principles.

      • More of the story….

        My van had 4 flat tires and just barely enough gas to get to a gas station.

        My Mom relented – hers is an unconditional love of her children – and forced my Dad to open their home back up for me. She begged me to come home.

        The only thing I had of value that I saved was a top-of-the-line camera and equipment – probably worth a few grand.

        I went to a pawn shop for the cash. I needed, I figured, about $200 to get home.

        The first shop offered $70. I left.
        Went to the 2nd, and it was the same offer.

        It gleaned on me that this was the “going rate”, no matter the value. I was doomed.
        I went to the 3rd, and would be the last, pawn shop. If this didn’t do it, I’d forget the whole thing and probably would become a super-criminal. I had “friends” on the street that I would have been able to rally around me, and today, I’d be a crime Lord.

        Yep, the 3rd said “$70”. I shook my head, and said “Might as well be zero”, and started to leave.

        An old Jew in the back stepped out and said “How much do you need?”
        “$200”
        “Why?”
        “I’m trying to get home and that’s what I need to fix my van and gas it up”

        He looked up at his son and said “Give the boy $300. He needs to eat too”
        The son protested: “Dad! You can’t keep doing that!”

        “GIVE THE BOY THE MONEY! I know he will be back!”

        The old Jew took my camera set a placed it up on a top shelf saying: “Don’t worry. It will right here when you get back”.

        I came back a few weeks later, and paid back the loan, plus his great profit.

        The old Jew smiled at his son, who too was smiling while shaking his head, and as he got my camera set saying “See, I told you. I know these things….I knew he was a good boy”

        That old Jew saved my life.

        • I also once had a Jew save my life as well.

          I wish I could find her.

          • Yeah, me as well.

            A few years later, when I was -once again- successful, wealthy but this time living on my principles, I wanted to go back and thank that old man for what he did. It was such a critical point in my life – without that act, who knows what I evil I would have become. Think “The Joker”.

            The shop was closed.

            I never even knew his name.

            • “I’ve proved my point. I’ve demonstrated there’s no difference between me and everyone else!

              All it takes is one bad day to reduce the sanest man alive to lunacy.

              That’s how far the world is from where I am. Just one bad day. You had a bad day once, am I right? I know I am. I can tell. You had a bad day and everything changed.

              You had a bad day, and it drove you as crazy as everybody else… Only you won’t admit it!

              You have to keep pretending that life makes sense, that there’s some point to all this struggling! God you make me want to puke. I mean, what is it with you?

              What made you what you are? Girlfriend killed by the mob, maybe? Brother carved up by some mugger? Something like that, I bet. Something like that…

              Something like that happened to me, you know. I… I’m not exactly sure what it was. Sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another… If I’m going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!

              Ha ha ha!

              But my point is… My point is, I went crazy. When I saw what a black, awful joke the world was, I went crazy as a coot! I admit it! Why can’t you? I mean, you’re not unintelligent! You must see the reality of the situation.

              Do you know how many times we’ve come close to world war three over a flock of geese on a computer screen? Do you know what triggered the last world war?

              An argument over how many telegraph poles Germany owed its war debt creditors!

              Telegraph poles! Ha ha ha ha HA! It’s all a joke! Everything anybody ever valued or struggled for… it’s all a monstrous, demented gag! So why can’t you see the funny side? Why aren’t you laughing?”

              • See, there were these two guys in a lunatic asylum. And one night, they decide they don’t like living in the asylum anymore. They decide they’re going to escape! So, like, they get up onto the roof, and there, just across this narrow gap, they see the rooftops of the town, stretching away into the moonlight. Stretching away to freedom. Now, the first guy, he jumps right across with no problem. But his friend, his friend daren’t make the leap. Y’see… y’see, he’s afraid of falling. So then the first guy has an idea… He says, ‘Hey, I have a flashlight with me! I’ll shine it across the gap between the buildings. You can walk across the beam and join me!’ But the second guy just shakes his head. He suh-says… he says ‘Wh-what do you think I am? Crazy? You’d turn it off when I was halfway across

    • Well said Anita!! (except that little Southern jab on cotton pickin’)

      My church has a new & very young priest, all fired up about spreading the word of Christ.
      Good for him I say, and yet it’s kinda a letdown. Our congregation is mostly elderly, and while his sermons are good, few stimulate or excite anyone in this crowd. I think one of the reasons is they have already been down the road this young man now travels. They have had their own moments of self reflection, epifanies and shame. Who is to judge if their principles are theirs or rote learning passed on from up high? Is there a test they need to take, or can their actions not speak louder & with more sincerity that any words?

      I think self examination is important, but it’s an arbitrary value that I alone assign. I also value self actualization, but again, it’s only as important as I make it to be…Who is to say they guy that watches sports 80 hours a week isn’t more principled than me obsessed with news/politics? Maybe he’s happier and therefore his family is also happier. At the end of our lives, what do we want to look back on and remember as our accomplishments?

      Articulating the best arbitrary description of the arbitrary concept of principles is not high on my list. I agree having principles is important. Putting it to words, less so. After all, words have different meanings to different people.

      • The problem with your position on principle is you believe it is arbitrary.
        Pick from a Chinese menu and go with it.

        No, they are REASONED, not arbitrary. The “arbitrary” principles is the reason most people are so badly screwed up.

        It is not whether you read politics or watch TV. It is the IDEAS and THOUGHTS in your head. If you do not think, you cannot have a principle.

        it is not about “happy”. Simple search for happiness leads to evil pragmatism … “as long as I am happy, who cares?”

        Happy does not make accomplishments.
        Struggle leads to accomplishments.

        If you search for ‘happy’, then the first road block and hurt and cost, you stop, retreat. Principles push you forward regardless.

        If you can’t find the words, you haven’t a fog of clue to what you have (or not). Empty space.

        Idle mind is devil’s playground.

        • The sound of pretenses falling…

          “No, they are REASONED, not arbitrary. The “arbitrary” principles is the reason most people are so badly screwed up.”

          No, we have different principles. Yours and mine are similar, but still different. But far from us is the religious zealot, Christian or Muslim, that wants to force their “principles/beliefs on us & the world. And then there are the other billions and their principles and void where it should be. Most will lead a moral life. I think a modern society should define it’s principles. I don’t expect that from every individual.

          • LOI,

            But your claim is baseless.

            You can’t even articulate your principles, so how can you measure them against mine to say “they are different” or not?

            You don’t know your principles at all.

            Principles are NOT gained by rote! They are gained by REASON. If you cannot articulate your principles, you cannot reason them. Period. Empty space.

            Certainly principled people can have different core principles – core principles are immune to “right or wrong” – core principles DEFINE right and wrong for that person. They are the measuring stick of ethics, not created by ethics.

            Most do NOT live a moral life. That is your self-delusion created by you to justify your actions. Most people want to believe they are moral but they are not.

            Most people run from begin moral, because it means actually acting on principle. They think “doing good” is moral, but it is not. (See previous post on the difference between “good” and “moral”)

            • Did you, good sir, listen to my argument? Alanis sings about wanting “intellectual intercourse” , isn’t that what this is about? I think I am “principled”. I am not motivated to explain or express them to you, so you deem me to be an empty space. OK, I’ve been called worse.

              How many principles do I need to express? Ten was enough for the Lord…
              1. I shall not kill…
              except I would to defend myself, wife, kids, random strangers….
              2. I shall not lie…
              except I will & do. I have put a false date of birth on FaceBook because I don’t like to share personal information with everybody. Therefore I am a liar.
              3. I shall not covet…..oh, forget it, I’m going to hell….Making good on not committing adultery is one thing, not thinking it though???

              I try to not harm others.
              I try to help others when they are in need.
              I try to associate with like minded people and avoid people with values I scorn.
              I treat my wife as a partner, not a servant. I do not condone men who abuse their wives.

              I wonder if we as a nation should do the same? Should the US refuse to trade or interact with countries that ignore basic human rights?

              A valuable survey of the second-class condition of women in Arab countries appears in the NGO Monitor Report that was issued on December 20, 2013. It makes the important point that the so-called Arab Spring of 2011, beginning in Tunisia in December 2010, aroused expectations of advances towards democracy in the Middle East once the autocratic and authoritarian rulers had been deposed in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen and Libya. It was hoped that the mass demonstrations in those and other Arab countries would bring about major reform, especially adherence to human rights.

              The bitter truth is that the Middle East is not, as Raymond Chandler said about his fictional Los Angeles, a very fragrant world. Part of the fetid odor emanates from the continuing discrimination against women and their resulting subordinate status in Arab and many Islamic countries. These countries have refused to abide by the international calls on them to eliminate the inequality of women.

              Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/01/an_end_to_discrimination_against_women_in_the_middle_east.html#ixzz2pGeC7Jue

              • LOI,

                You are great at making up excuses about your principles, yet type away constantly explaining why you don’t express your principles.

                Sir, you don’t have any.

                Those that you gave are ACTIONS, not principles.

                Why don’t you kill?
                Why don’t you lie?
                Why? Why? Why?

                For you, merely because someone told you. Someone else’s mind occupies the space in your head.

            • Proud Bubblehead reporting back,

              See? There you go micro thinking again, causing me problems where I had none. Put me in the pawn shop in place of the Jew. Or put me in your shoes going back in. I would have done the same thing as the Jew and as you. I don’t have to articulate anything to act in a principled manner. I don’t have the headache of having to think about what my principles are before I act. That’s just too much baggage for one bubblehead. Call me pragmatic if you like..matter of fact let’s examine the definition of pragmatic:

              dealing with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations. Synonyms: practical, matter-of-fact, sensible, down-to-earth, commonsensical, businesslike, having both/one’s feet on the ground….

              Maybe you just live in a theoretical state of mind, Maybe you need to S P E L L everything out to yourself to assure yourself that what you do is morally right. I don’t know. All I know is my approach has worked for me. My approach obviously doesn’t work for you.But here we both are in the same span of time, each living what we individually assume is a moral life. I bubbleheaded myself to this point, you had an awakening which steered you to this point. But we are both still in the exact same place..we just got here on different paths. So tell me again why I need to articulate stuff?

              Just for kicks..tell me one of your ever so thought out principles. I probably share the same principle and don’t know it..because I don’t feel the need to list them. Before I run for cover, just know I’m bubbleheading my way through this post..no harm intended..laughing as I run 😉

              • The old Jew did nothing immoral or moral. There was no confronting evil. Either choice of “Yes or No” did not define moral vs immoral. What he did was good – for me – and that’s it. Evil was not dispersed.

                If I turned evil because of it, it was because of ME, not him.

                You DO have to articulate your principles, otherwise you don’t have any. Simple as that.

                If you cannot explain something, you do not know something.

                It is not “theoretical” – it is absolutely fundamental.

                You are walking around with a spool of string as your measuring stick, and whenever it suits your pleasant pragmatism, you will shorten or length the string and declare “yep, this is the same length as the last thing I measured – exactly one string length long!”

              • “What I do to others grants them the right to do to same to me”

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Anita

                The danger of assuming “pragmatism” as a standard is hidden in the definition used.

                Notice how it leads you to conclude everything else is “theoretical”. In other words, THINKING or reaching conclusions based on REASON become “theoretical” and thus should be ignored or discarded.

                Remember, PRAGMATISM is the ethical standard of PROGRESSIVISM. Ask yourself if that is consistent with YOUR values. I suspect the answer is no.

                I would also like to add that you are absolutely NOT as “simple” as you are trying to make yourself out to be. 😉

              • You are walking around with a spool of string as your measuring stick, and whenever it suits your pleasant pragmatism, you will shorten or length the string and declare “yep, this is the same length as the last thing I measured – exactly one string length long!”

                So, I come along and look at all these things you’ve measured.

                Some are so long I can’t see the other end.
                Others are so short, I need a magnifying glass.
                And in between are hundreds if not thousands of all different sizes.

                I turn to you say: “You say these things are all the same? Look! They are all different!”

                You say back: “Well, yeah I guess, but my string tells me they are all the same length!
                Exactly one string length long!

                So how come I can’t find some of them because they are so small, and others can’t fit through the same door as others can?”

                Replace “string” with your ethics, and you get the meaning.

          • LOI,

            Look – a little philosophy.

            Ideology leads justification.
            What you believe in, you act on, then justify your act.

            If you believe Reds are bad, you kill Reds, then you say “It was them or it was me”.

            This is Universal – every person on earth does this.

            So how does one be moral?

            You must hold a supreme core principle as your ideology – one derived by reason, over many hard days of soul searching and hard thinking.

            Because everyone does the Ideology to action to justification, you had better get the first step right as rain.

            If you do, then there is no fear of being morally wrong – you have a supreme principle, you act on it, and can JUSTIFY it with REASON, because you already did the work.

            • “Why don’t you kill? Why don’t you lie? Why? Why? Why?

              For you, merely because someone told you. Someone else’s mind occupies the space in your head.”

              Err, NO! You assume I have not examined myself & my beliefs. True, I was taught as most children what was right/wrong, acceptable & what would result in punishment. I was exposed to Christianity, but did not have it shoved down my throat. I have know some very smart people over the years including present company. One thing I have learned is when any of them think they have figured out THE ONE ANSWER to a given issue, they are wrong. They may have one answer, maybe the best answer, but it never is all encompassing.

              Did you watch/listen to the video? Sure you can make the words come to mean almost anything you want them to, but isn’t that the point? Too often in these discussions most of us wander off, bored by the endless hair splitting.

              “So how does one be moral?
              You must hold a supreme core principle as your ideology – one derived by reason, over many hard days of soul searching and hard thinking. ”

              I’ve done that a few times Flagster, ended up re-affirming my belief in God. When I go to thinking about core principles, first is why am I here/what am I/what should I do/be….I have not ever written it out, doubt I ever will. You may consider me empty space, kinda insulting but I’m not interested in impressing you. I enjoy some of our discussions, but if you see me as a poor or failing student, that’s on you. I am simply not very interested in attempting to find the words for everything I think & believe. If I were stuck in -40 degree weather with no family, I might feel differently.

              • “Err, NO! You assume I have not examined myself & my beliefs.”

                No, I didn’t assume that. You said you didn’t. You said you can’t articulate anything about them which absolutely means you didn’t “examine” them at all.

                The best you may have done is watch introspectively a thought go through your head and go “hmmm, not bad”. You didn’t question “why”, or anything. It was there and it was gone and you dusted yourself off, patted yourself on your back and said “Boy that was good work, LOI!”

                But examine? Not even to the depth of a pencil line on a piece of paper.

                Did you watch/listen to the video?

                Sorry, I don’t base any of my philosophies on drop-out, semi-educated, self-absorbed pop stars

                I tend to go for the level like Socrates or Cicero.

                I’ve done that a few times Flagster, ended up re-affirming my belief in God.

                So the body of your core belief is to hold up a figment of imagination and fantasy.

                And then people wonder why evil grows.

              • “-40 and don’t have the time”

                Yep, yet you have hours upon hours to post dribble instead, and pages and pages to explain why you don’t want type pages and pages in order to understand yourself.

                Self-delusion to avoid the pain of self-contradiction is what it really is.

                Don’t worry, LOI, you and billions of others share the same condition – and are quite “happy” about it.

                Yet, you post here wondering why evil grows all around you.

              • LOI

                As I posted years back when I first found this site,

                Evil finds fertile fields in the contradictions of men beliefs.

              • LOI

                Instead of resorting to pop stars for your philosophy, how about a little Socrates.

                “Know thy self”

                Socrates says, “But I have no leisure for them at all; and the reason, my friend, is this: I am not yet able to know myself; so it seems to me ridiculous, when I do not yet know that, to investigate irrelevant things

              • Oh, and by the way, it is because Socrates was relentless upon the powerful of Athens in displaying their utter lack of or utter contradiction of their principles, he was the most hated man in Athens.

                Your obvious frustration with my constant pushing is exactly what those powerful Athens felt too. Damn irritating, true?

                It kinda means what it meant back in ancient Athens, too.

            • Dale A. Albrecht says:

              BF….you are a true desciple of the “Socratic Method”

  29. @ JAC…….just got back into town……your Ducks kicked our ass and deservedly so…..great quarterback. I dont think you sent me your address but I will check…..if not, I will let you now. I need to send you some TEXAS thangs……………….happy new year to you.

  30. @Black Flag, I believe that my core principal is to live and let live (as BL likes to say). In short, live my life without negatively affecting those who do not interfere with my life. To be free of others actions should be everyone’s goal, unless those actions are welcome (e.g. getting help from a neighbor fixing a problem). I also believe in helping my neighbors, when the situation presents the need. I offer, when they accept, I help! 🙂

    • Ok, test it.

      Do you kill animals to live? I’d guess you do.
      So “live and let live” doesn’t work – you have exceptions.

      Core principle has no exceptions.

      So dig deeper.
      Ask yourself “How do I decide what lives and what dies? What do I use to measure that?”

      • I was thinking of human interaction, now you bring in all animals. 🙄 In that area, the deeper core is survival. I kill animals that provide nutrition and clothing.

        • Sorry, my fault – bad analogy to include animals.

          I, too, was thinking humans – so let’s try again.

          You would, I am sure, kill another person for some reason.
          So your “live and let live” has exceptions.

          Ask yourself “How do I decide who lives and who dies? What do I use to measure that?”

          • You are correct. I will defend the lives of family and myself from attackers. I will defend my property from thieves. In many cases, I may not have to kill, and will do my best to avoid killing another human. Some things are just unavoidable when fighting evil.

            • Ok, but explain WHY you chose to act that way or another way.

              What do you use to measure the circumstance that says “This I do” or “This I do not do”?

              Pretend in your mind a set of circumstances, and the choices you hypothetically would make under both conditions.

              “This bad thing is happening, and I would act to kill”
              “This bad thing is happening, but I would not act to kill”

              Two bad thing, but different actions. What made you chose differently?

              • Actually this is simple. I assess the threat and make my decision. In many cases threatening the attacker is enough to end the threat. I would use all available resources to avoid killing. No hypothetical circumstance can compare to reality. Fortunately, I’m well versed in threat assessment and the accurate use of firearms. That gives me a better advantage in the face of danger, avoiding any loss of life! 😉

              • Again, dig deeper.

                You say “I assess the circumstance” – well, I figured that.

                The question is “What mental thinking and idea or concept do you USE to assess the circumstance?”

                How do you KNOW this is “the time” or “not this time”?

                What defines the difference?

              • It is the actions of the attacker that determines the threat level. Are his/her actions life threatening. In some cases, there is no time to think when it’s clear it’s life threatening. I act based upon the actions of others. If it’s non life threatening, no lethal force is required.

              • “It is the actions of the attacker that determines the threat level. Are his/her actions life threatening.” In some cases, there is no time to think when it’s clear it’s life threatening. I act based upon the actions of others. If it’s non life threatening, no lethal force is required”

                Ok, so deeper yet.

                You appear to hold a sanctity to human life. Defend the living from those that wish to kill human life.
                True?

              • So, not to interrupt this work, but you can see what I mean already.

                You thought “live and let live” was your principle, but it isn’t.

                It is a CONSEQUENCE of acting on some principle, not a principle itself (as this “live and let live” has obvious exceptions, explained by your now declared “sanctity of life”).

                Now, you can continue with me in this why, why and why again until we find that core, but you can do this to yourself as well.

                You continue this “why, why, why” until, absolutely solidly, you say “just because”…. when there are no more “why’s” left to ask. A root premise – a belief that requires and cannot have a proof or justification.

                THAT is your core principle. THAT is what is your measuring stick. THAT which cannot be measured by anything, yet provides the true measure to other things to establish YOUR OWN morals and ethics.

              • Again Gman, that is merely declarative with no substance.

                Again, “Sanctity of life” appears your measure here. If threat of death or harm, you would use lethal force, without that threat, you would not. True? (Question is answered with “True or Not True” … if “Not True”, explain.)

              • True, but that doesn’t always mean with lethal force. I always feel that compassion should always play a role in one’s actions. Sometimes that compassion is lethal force.

              • “Sometimes that compassion is lethal force.”

                So you would mercy kill another innocent person?

              • “A root premise – a belief that requires and cannot have a proof or justification.”

                Geez, senseless.

                I meant:
                “A root premise – a belief that cannot have a proof or justification. It just “is””

  31. @ BF……not under estimating the Russian economy…..just watching closely as we do deal somewhat in international currencies……it is robust but geographically limited. The international community does not trust the RUB. But, there is an however. China now becomes a huge player. The Yuan is faltering badly and China is about to devalue their currency yet again…..Inflation is about to soar and their real estate market is about to bubble making our debacle look like a romper room reject. As soon as the exchange rate of yuan and rub get close……things will start to happen…..and, of course, the Euro is no where close as it is divesting in the Rub…yes, sir…interesting times.

  32. @ BF…..another interesting aspect of the Race to the Rhine…….The Russian counter attack of Germany was of such speed and very well calculated, that it so surprised the Allies, they could not move the assets from the southern campaign fast enough….so they did the next thing and robbed the Pacific campaign of badly needed assets…..thereby, prolonging that one as well. What the Russians under estimated was the industrial strength of the US in mobilization of Rosie the Riveter…..

    No one is saying they are not smart…..but they will shoot themselves in the foot…..sort of like our Dallas Cowboys….very adept at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

  33. BF, Not true. Not all threats require lethal force. NOT killing another human being should be a priority for everyone. Protecting the “sanctity of life” should be priority #1 when faced with evil. I’m sure there are circumstances where killing is the only recourse to survival, other times, killing is not necessary or needed. How one views the threat is key to one’s actions, and each situation is different. Shoot to wound is always an option in most cases where guns are involved. Sometimes the odds are overwhelming and killing is the only option for survival. I hope that never happens.

    Mercy killing decisions should only be made by the suffering. I would not make that decision easily, nor do I ever want to be in that situation.

    • What’s not true?
      You said: ” Protecting the “sanctity of life” should be priority #1 when faced with evil.”
      Is that true or not?

      I asked about mercy killing, is this what is not true?
      Yet, you then said:
      “Mercy killing decisions should only be made by the suffering; I would not make that decision easily,” So, it is true.

      Contradictions, Gman, Contradictions. You simply can’t declare “no”, and then answer with a whole bunch of “yes”.

      Fix it – get clarity.

      • Again, “Sanctity of life” appears your measure here. If threat of death or harm, you would use lethal force, without that threat, you would not. True?

        That doesn’t have one correct answer. Without a threat, no lethal force is certainly true. In the Threat of death OR harm, lethal force may or may not be necessary. So, under threat, it’s situational, it would be wonderful to only need non-lethal force, but that’s a pipe dream in today’s society.

        I would end the life of one who is suffering and requests it, yes. But that is NOT lethal force. That is compassion in it’s worst form.

        • “Again, “Sanctity of life” appears your measure here.”
          NO!
          We are working YOUR principles, not mine. I asked question, you responded and I repeated your answer back.

          Do not assume this is about ME. I’ve already done my work.
          We are peeling YOUR onion, not mine.

          I would end the life of one who is suffering and requests it, yes. But that is NOT lethal force. That is compassion in it’s worst form.

          So, you would kill non-threatening, non-violent people – when, above, you said that was the worse of evils.

          So what principle do you invoke now that creates exceptions to your use of fatal violence?

          So you see, sanctity of (innocent) life isn’t your principle either. It, too, is merely a consequence of a deeper principle.

          There is more onion left to peel

          • “Again, “Sanctity of life” appears your measure here.” UGH! Sorry, that was a copy/paste from your post.

            Mercy killing. Example: My Pops has made it clear (to me and in his will) that he is not to be left on life support, if his life will not be at least the same as it has been the last 3 years. So, in short, if he has a stroke and faces living the rest of his life bedridden, he choses to end his life. I may have to make that decision if he can’t communicate. What would you do? I will abide by his wishes.

            Personal survival is the only principle in life that can lead to any and all desires that one has in life. One cannot help others if he/she is dead. Self defense is a natural right when one’s life is threatened.

            • Again, another empty declarative.

              WHY do you believe killing your innocent father is “ok” when you’ve stated “live and let live”?

            • Here’s another
              “Personal survival is the only principle in life that can lead to any and all desires that one has in life”

              So if I’m drowning and to live I push you off the lifeboat, and you drown instead – that’s “ok” by you, given this above declaration?

          • BF,

            You make my brain hurt. Those of us who have no core principles ( since we can’t articulate them), are we evil? If you say yes, we’re going to have problems because you said that evil grows in the absence of principles. You also said that only a few on this board have been able to articulate their principles. Extending that out across the planet, there are very few who have core principles. How can you explain all the good in the world if people have no principles?

            sorry to kick in and out today..11+ inches in 24 hrs makes for much shoveling, also have a birthday boy to celebrate with today.. Back later, again (I know, you’re heart aches for me in your -40* temps)

            • You make my brain hurt.
              That’s my job as a philosopher – pain exists only where contradictions exist which is where evil exists.

              Those of us who have no core principles ( since we can’t articulate them), are we evil?
              No. But you give great power to evil because of it

              If you say yes, we’re going to have problems because you said that evil grows in the absence of principles. You also said that only a few on this board have been able to articulate their principles. Extending that out across the planet, there are very few who have core principles. How can you explain all the good in the world if people have no principles?

              Because there are a so-very-few who actually have principles, the lead the masses to act against evil, even when the masses have no idea why.

              Look, principled people attract good people. We admire Jesus, Gandhi, etc. – put posters up about them, sing songs, make holidays. Why? They tried to live a principled life against evil.

              But this same effect works for evil too. Evil people attract good people – look at how easily tyrants get power.

              So how do you find more of the former and less of the latter? By knowing YOUR OWN PRINCIPLES and aligning yourself truthfully to those that share them.

        • So, Gman, you see we are already down at least two levels below your first claimed “principle” of “live and let live”.

          We’ve established that isn’t at all your principle – you’ve piled exceptions (contradictions) upon that already.

          This is the work that is necessary – to continue peeling away at the exceptions, asking “Why is this an exception? How did I make this determination? What did I use to declare this exception?”

          Do this over and over and over again until you can’t do it anymore.
          Then you’ve found the bedrock – your core principle.

          • Rights, respect

            • What “rights” do you believe demands “respect”?

              • …All of them.

                We all have natural inalienable rights. A simple definition for exercising them is ‘Live’.

                But we do not have a right to violate others, therefor in accordance with valuing rights, we respect others exercising their rights.. simply defined as ‘Let Live’.

              • Rights are as a principle amorphous -“without a clearly defined shape or form.”

                By your principle, if I declare a right to your car……?

              • Further,

                Rights are true throughout the universe and apply to all living beings.

                Example: A cabbage plant has the same right to defend itself on Earth as you do on Mars or some distant place, as much as an alien has a right to defend itself elsewhere or Earth.

                The contradiction in the originally stated premise is that you don’t have a right to violate cabbage by picking it and eating it, but if you do not violate some organisms, you will die, thus you have the right to do what you must to survive…which means violating the rights of something.

                If a cabbage could use a firearm, you could not reasonably argue against it wielding said firearm in defense.

                I love paradoxes.

              • Are you suggesting rights are whatever you say they are?

                Are you suggesting that one person has the right to the property of another?

              • No, I mean you must define “rights”, otherwise it is merely an empty idea.

          • Let’s get back to this tomorrow my friend 🙂 Go to the new thread in the morning and we can see where things go 🙂

  34. ” LOI

    Instead of resorting to pop stars for your philosophy, how about a little Socrates.

    “Know thy self”

    Socrates says, “But I have no leisure for them at all; and the reason, my friend, is this: I am not yet able to know myself; so it seems to me ridiculous, when I do not yet know that, to investigate irrelevant things ”

    • “Instead of resorting to pop stars for your philosophy”
      Ehh, so “learning to love myself is the greatest love of all”? That will get you arrested if ya do it in public (so I’m told).

      Most of this discussion reminds me of intellectual elitism. And it’s kinda funny when you talk to mathematicians, who are very smart, think they hold the secrets to the universe. And many then think that makes their opinion more valuable than others.

      Philosophy, is the glass half full or half empty?
      The answer is to drink til you get your fill!

      “Plato’s answer: aristocracy. Again, however, Plato did not mean by this term what is today usually meant. When we hear the word ”aristocracy” we think of the nobility class, as in the expression ”the landed aristocracy.” But the word itself simply means ”rule of the best,” and that is exactly what Plato favored – the rule of the best. And who are the best? Those who are enlightened with regard to reality, truth, and goodness. And who are these? Why, philosophers, of course – those who have emerged from the darkness of the Cave and have beheld the Good. Plato himself calls this the central thesis of the Republic: ”Philosophers must be kings.” A philosopher-king”

      A history professor would have a different view, unless you know history, you are doomed to repeat those mistakes.

      I’ve done the self reflection to the point that I’m satisfied with myself. That is the point. I am pleasing myself and have done what I wanted for my own reasons. I have no reason to justify or explain it to others. Any that want to look inside themselves, more power to you!
      I think it’s a good thing for those who want to grow themselves. After that self examination, it may change how you act towards others. It may have no effect. If you have lead a moral life because you parents or church told you to, you may act exactly the same, not because it’s your own moral code you follow.

      About life, it’s not sacred.

      We can wish it was. We can act as if it’s so, we can pretend. But it’s not. Life is finite, not infinite. Everyone & every living thing die eventually. It’s just a question of time. So life is really about time, your time. How do you measure your time? Most would do so with their experiences, the girl you kissed, a basket you made, a child’s joy witnessed…

      Your life, your time…Spend it well……

      • Plato is evil, and became such evil to reconcile the killing of his mentor.

        Socrates is not evil. Read him, and avoid Plato.

        Philosophy is not half empty/half full.

        It is a search for truth – Universal truth.

        As I said earlier, the only thing more dismally understood by most people then economics is philosophy.

        And, that is why comment to you to the point of ridicule. If you are “happy” with your introspection, then you have failed. Obviously nothing of great Epiphany and life changing occurred. You found no internal evil to excise; nope, “you’re happy with yourself” – happily feeding evil with your left hand while writing with the other how it feels good.

        Because you believe others delivered to you a moral code is exactly why evil grows – you don’t have a clue to what they delivered to be good or evil.

        You are a bubble head – blowing in the winds having no idea what is truly evil or good or moral.

        For you, you haven’t care that you are growing evil – you just want YOU to be happy. Don’t give a damn otherwise, right?

        • “You are a bubble head – blowing in the winds having no idea what is truly evil or good or moral.”

          (I recall besting you in a debate on health insurance cost. So this bubble head has schooled you in the past. Don’t make me open that can back up)(lol)

          “For you, you haven’t care that you are growing evil – you just want YOU to be happy. Don’t give a damn otherwise, right?”

          (Aren’t you the one that says there is no good or evil? But yes, I do want to be happy. Is there anyone who does not want to be happy? That’s not all I want. It is a poor measure of my goals and aspirations. When I work, it’s to make money & provide for my family. That makes me happy, providing for them. I enjoy doing a difficult job well. I enjoy teaching my children to shoot, drive, to think & do for themselves. Happy, happy, happy..)

          “Don’t give a damn otherwise, right?” (Very wrong, but you are welcome to your opinion. I think you are guilty of intellectual elitism. You so value your own opinion that you are scornful & dismissive of others. If you are so concerned about this, what then are your core values? Do they include insulting someone who disagrees with you? You see an expression of mine here, laughing & jesting instead of getting upset & throwing out insults)

          • (I recall besting you in a debate on health insurance cost.)
            I don’t recall that at all

            Aren’t you the one that says there is no good or evil?

            Now I am sure you have me utterly confused with someone else.
            In fact, I have repeatedly given my definition of evil on this blog.

            Is there anyone who does not want to be happy?

            What I said about dismal philosophical education……

            “Happy” is a goal.

            It is not “morals” or “ethics”


            “Don’t give a damn otherwise, right?” (Very wrong, but you are welcome to your opinion. I think you are guilty of intellectual elitism.


            No.
            As you stated above, you have a “goal” of happy.
            To achieve such a goal, you will act

            But you have no means, other than garbage other people have stuffed into your head whether such an act is moral.

            You have done nothing to determine this – you pretend you have, as some way to protect your own self-image – but you have actually done squat.


            You so value your own opinion that you are scornful & dismissive of others.
            How can I be dismissive of your opinion when in fact you have offered dick-all?

            I am scornful of your lack of thoughtfulness because you still believe YOUR opinions, based on thoughtlessness, should be meritorious.

            Clue: they are not. They are bubbles.

            what then are your core values?
            Given above already.

            Do they include insulting someone who disagrees with you?
            It is not an insult.
            It is a description of your mind.

            You see it insulting as you see it to be true.

      • LOI,

        I was just poking at Flag, ..demonstrating how pop stars preach the message of understanding, accepting and loving thyself.

        • BL
          “Preaching” is not “knowing”. Pop stars “preach” rape, drugs and violence too with the same intensity.

          • I am just teasing you a little by pointing out an exception to your statement, demonstrating that you can indeed find the same message in popular music.

            So it isn’t exactly Socrates. But it still has a similar philosophy and message.

            I am also guessing Whitney Houston is a better singer. Ya agotta love Whitney. (R.I.P)

            • First, it isn’t “Whitney’s” philosophy – she just moved her mouth.

              Second, like any verbiage, a few lines doesn’t make it something to measure or ingrain as a “truth”. How the heck do you know what is said is, in fact, a universal truth or perhaps an universal lie?

              It takes a lot more than a song to manifest a philosophy.

              • I am not suggesting it is a substitute. I am suggesting it is in line with knowing thyself philosophy. It at least has a value of provoking thought.

                And I don’t care if she wrote it or not. I think she did a good job.

  35. Been tossed into moderation…..huh?

%d bloggers like this: